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 Strategy ICE Scoring |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 30-60 min | 60-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |