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 Context Canvas |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an environment of users, systems, and constraints is hard to grasp, it puts the context compactly on the table. It creates a clear reading of influence, boundary, and dependency. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Context canvas, Open questions, Shared context notes | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ContextFramingRequirementsCanvas | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |