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
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min30–60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-124-83-20 Reviewer4-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
DecisionRolesGovernance
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods