View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min | 10-20 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 4-100+ | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |