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 |  Engineering Golden Path |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz 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. | When teams need a reliable default path for frequent use, sprawl quickly emerges without any guiding logic. Golden Path bundles the preferred path so good practice becomes easy and deviation becomes deliberate. | 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 a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 4-5 Tage | 1-3 Tage Setup, laufend | 1-4 Wochen | 2-10 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-8 | 2-8 | 3-10 Kunden | 5-20 Nutzer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List |
Tagsno overlap | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | EngineeringProductivityGovernance | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | PrototypeValidationMVP |