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
Paper illustration for NoEstimates.
Agile
NoEstimates
Paper illustration of a calm four-quadrant Assumption Map with hypothesis cards and emphasis on important assumptions with little evidence.
Product Discovery
Assumption Mapping
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules.When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.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
LowMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
60-90 minlaufend45-60 min1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
4-102-122-81-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentThroughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing RulesAssumption map, Test backlog, Risk rankingExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
EstimationForecastingFlow
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods