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
Process Mapping method illustration showing its working structure
Operations
Process Mapping
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
A3 Problem-Solving workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
A3 Problem Solving
Paper illustration of a review with planned work, actual event sequence, comparison, and assigned improvement actions.
Operations
After-Action Review
Purposedifferent
With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots.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.For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together.After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-4 Wochen45-90 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-101-62-53-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement BacklogExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryA3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause AnalysisLessons learned, Action items, Event summary
Tagsno overlap
ProcessOperationsImprovement
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations
LearningOperationsImprovement
Add more methods