This question can be answered by considering both the ways in which Ibsen in this play created a drama that was similar to Stanislavski's ideas about drama, but also how Ibsen went beyound Stanislavski's presentation. Both agreed that drama should reflect real life, and as part of this goal of attaining realism, they believed in the use of colloquial language, the presentation of untraditional characters who crossed various boundaries. An example of this would be Nora when she takes out a loan and leaves her husband. This is a clear way in which her character transgresses the social boundaries of her time. In addition, both Ibsen and Stanislavski presented characters as overcoming conflicts through the course of the play.
What Ibsen adds to his drama and to this play in particular is that he uses his play to present his own social and political views to challenge the perspective of the audience. This is of course most clearly achieved through the presentation of Nora and the way that she abandons her husband and children for an uncertain future, therefore challenging patriarchal society and the norms of Ibsen's contemporary world.
Thus we can see this play in many ways reflects the shared beliefs of Stanislavski and Ibsen, but at the same time we can also argue that Ibsen deliberately took these principles further in order to shock and challenge the accepted norms and values of his day.