methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A paper-based illustration representing Design Sprint with its core stages and visible working result.
Innovation
Design Sprint
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
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.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
4-5 Tage5-15 min30-60 min je Interview1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
5-83-205-12 Interviews3-10 Kunden
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Prototype, Test Findings, Decision RationaleRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks
Tagsno overlap
Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
Add more methods