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 |  Innovation Starbursting |  Innovation Design Charrette |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 30-60 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 3-10 | 10-50 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |