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 Goal Question Metric with its method-specific working model.
Engineering
Goal Question Metric
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of Counter Metrics with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
Counter Metrics
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify technical problems, hypotheses, and next steps in concrete terms. It breaks a technical problem into testable parts. The result is captured as a GQM table and metric briefs.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
90-180 min45-90 min1-2 h30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-62-82-82-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
GQM Table, Metric ProfilesAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportCounter Metric List, Guardrail Definitions
Tagsno overlap
MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
MetricsMeasurementStrategyExperiments
Add more methods