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 Three-Point Estimation.
Decision Making
Three-Point Estimation
Paper illustration of HEART Framework with its method-specific working model.
UX Research
HEART Framework
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of Counter Metrics with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
Counter Metrics
Purposedifferent
A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes.Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.When a headline metric could mask side effects, it adds guardrail signals against unwanted outcomes. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a counter-metric list and guardrail definitions.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
10-30 min je Item120 min initial, dann laufend1-2 h30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
1-83-64-122-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesHEART-GSM Table, DashboardAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsCounter Metric List, Guardrail Definitions
Tagsno overlap
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
MetricsMeasurementStrategyExperiments
Add more methods