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 arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration for Smoke Test.
Product Discovery
Smoke Test
Purposedifferent
arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.
Complexitydifferent
LowHighHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage1-4 h1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
1-43-81-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment ViewChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
RiskDecisionSensemaking
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods