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 showing three sorted card stacks and an open question about a possible group.
UX Research
Card Sorting
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of a calm four-quadrant Assumption Map with hypothesis cards and emphasis on important assumptions with little evidence.
Product Discovery
Assumption Mapping
Purposedifferent
When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations.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.DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.
Complexitydifferent
LowHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
20-45 min1-4 h1-2 h45-60 min
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question3-82-82-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Content groups, Label set, IA hypothesesChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportAssumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationStructure
RiskDecisionSensemaking
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
Add more methods