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
Design Thinking as a learning loop: an observation notebook, a focused problem statement, different idea sketches, a cardboard prototype and user-test notes. Feedback leads to new understanding.
Innovation
Design Thinking
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for Wizard of Oz Test
Product Discovery
Wizard of Oz Test
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 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 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 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
HighMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen1-4 Wochen30-60 min je Interview2-10 Tage
Participantsdifferent
4-103-10 Kunden5-12 Interviews5-20 Nutzer
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Problem Statement, Prototype, Test LearningsConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP RisksProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsPrototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List
Tagsno overlap
InnovationPrototypeResearch
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
PrototypeValidationMVP
Add more methods