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 Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Paper illustration of Futures Wheel with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Futures Wheel
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Purposedifferent
Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain.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.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 is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
1-5 Tage60-120 min1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
4-123-101-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanFutures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision
Tagsno overlap
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
Add more methods