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 Concierge MVP |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 45–90 min | 4-5 Tage | 2-10 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 Kunden | 3-10 | 5-8 | 5-20 Nutzer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List |
Tagsno overlap | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | PrototypeValidationMVP |