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 Design Sprint |  Operations Change Analysis |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | 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 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 4-5 Tage | 45-120 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-8 | 2-6 | 3-10 Kunden | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |