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 |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |  Product Discovery Solution Interview |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | When a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 2-10 Tage | 30-60 min je Interview | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 Kunden | 5-20 Nutzer | 5-10 Interviews | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tags1 shared | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | PrototypeValidationMVP | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |