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 Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of Design Charrette with its method-specific working model.
Innovation
Design Charrette
Paper illustration for Smoke Test.
Product Discovery
Smoke Test
Purposedifferent
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.In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space.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
LowHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min1-4 WochenHalber Tag bis mehrere Tage1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
4-101-610-50Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopAsync
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summarySketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized DirectionInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods