View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Brainwriting |  Growth A/B Testing |  Innovation Crazy 8s |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When loud voices or hierarchy distort the idea search, the method creates a quiet entry into joint development. It gives everyone thinking space and gathers contributions without social brakes, making diversity more visible and easier to build on. | 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. | With only a few minutes available and a still-fuzzy solution search, the method forces a wide range of variants. It produces fast sketches before the first idea can settle in, making different directions directly comparable and open to further development. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-30 min | 1-4 Wochen | 8-15 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-6 | 1-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Idea sheets, Expanded concepts, Prioritized list | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Sketch Set, Idea Shortlist, Direction Options | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingCollaborationInclusionIdeas | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | BrainstormingSketchingSpeedDivergenceDesign sprint | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |