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 Thinking |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 | High | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 20-45 min | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | Based on research question | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | Information architectureNavigationStructure | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |