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 of a calm four-quadrant Assumption Map with hypothesis cards and emphasis on important assumptions with little evidence.
Product Discovery
Assumption Mapping
Paper illustration of RAID Log with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Delivery
RAID Log
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
When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting.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
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
45-60 min30 min Setup, dann laufend1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
2-81-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone1-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk rankingRAID Log, Status Report SourceExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods