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 Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting.
Engineering
Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable.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.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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
30-240 min60-90 min1-2 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
1-64-102-84-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis SummaryProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods