View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. | 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 | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 1-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-4 | Nutzertraffic | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | ValidationDemandMVP | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |