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 Futures Wheel with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Futures Wheel
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
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
The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event.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 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
MediumLowMediumHigh
Timedifferent
60-120 min20–45 min45-60 min1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
3-10Small cross-functional group2-81-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsRisk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logAssumption map, Test backlog, Risk rankingExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods