methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Purposedifferent
When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight.When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible.When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage30–60 min per interview45–90 min
Participantsdifferent
10-501 participant per interview3-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas
Paper illustration for Opportunity Interview
Product Discovery
Opportunity Interview