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 hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
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.In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.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 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
LowLowHighLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min20–45 min1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
4-10Small cross-functional group1-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRisk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods