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 Shape Up with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Shape Up
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Purposedifferent
Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts.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.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.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
MediumHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down1-4 Wochen45-90 min1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
2-4 pro Pitch1-62-8Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision
Tagsno overlap
PlanningDeliveryAutonomy
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
Add more methods