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 a JTBD interview notebook with a decision timeline, forces of change and a concise job hypothesis.
Product Discovery
Jobs to Be Done
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of a Test Card with four fields for hypothesis, test, metric, and success threshold.
Product Discovery
Test Card
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen60-120 min20-35 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-12 Interviews5-121-53-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity ListRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityTest Card with a pre-set thresholdRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
CustomerOutcomesNeeds
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods