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
Surveys method illustration showing its working structure
UX Research
Surveys
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When a topic needs to be validated broadly and many people can answer the same question, surveys gather structured feedback in a scalable form. Answers become comparable and segmentable instead of remaining merely anecdotal.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.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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighMedium
Timedifferent
3-14 Tage5-15 min1-4 Wochen1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
50+3-201-65-30
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Survey Results, Charts, Segment InsightsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
QuantitativeResearchValidation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods