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 System Dynamics Simulation |  Architecture Risk Storming |  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. | System Dynamics Simulation makes assumptions about time, delay, and feedback testable through experiments. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a simulation model and scenario reports. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. | 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 | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-60 min | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 60-90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-5 Modellierende, Stakeholder asynchron | 4-12 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Simulation Model, Scenario Reports | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | Systems thinkingDynamicsSimulationAnalysis | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |