View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 45-60 min | 1-5 Tage | 60-120 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |