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 |  Innovation TRIZ |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  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. | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | 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 | 1-4 h | 1-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |