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 the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Growth Experiment workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
Growth Experiment
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Purposedifferent
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 growth ideas surface quickly, the temptation to build immediately instead of learning is high. A Growth Experiment frames an assumption so target group, lever, and measurement are clear before the first deployment.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-2 Wochen60-90 min1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
5-301-64-101-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopAsync
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasExperiment card, Result summary, Next betProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
MarketingGrowthExperimentsLearning
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods