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 |  Innovation Double Diamond |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  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. | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 4-5 Tage | Wochen bis Monate | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 5-8 | 3-12 | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |