View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Decision Jam |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. | 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. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-120 min | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-8 | 5-30 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment |
Tagsno overlap | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop |