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 |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 1-3 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 5-30 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
