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 Current Reality Tree
Systems Thinking
Current Reality Tree
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration of Experiment Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Experiment Canvas
Purposedifferent
A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once.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.Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.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
HighHighLowLow
Timedifferent
2-6 h1-4 Wochen45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-81-62-81-5
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention IdeasExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanCompleted Experiment Canvas, Success Metric
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis
Add more methods