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 Feynman Technique.
Knowledge Modeling
Feynman Technique
Paper illustration of Counter Metrics with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
Counter Metrics
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Purposedifferent
The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work.When a headline metric could mask side effects, it adds guardrail signals against unwanted outcomes. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a counter-metric list and guardrail definitions.DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.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.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
20-60 min30-60 min1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
12-62-82-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study NotesCounter Metric List, Guardrail DefinitionsDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding
MetricsMeasurementStrategyExperiments
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods