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 for Contextual Inquiry.
UX Research
Contextual Inquiry
Paper illustration of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of Experiment Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Experiment Canvas
Purposedifferent
When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise.IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.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 experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen1-3 h1-4 Wochen30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
4-12 Beobachtungen2-81-61-5
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain PointsIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryCompleted Experiment Canvas, Success Metric
Tagsno overlap
UX researchObservationContext
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis
Add more methods