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 |  Innovation Double Diamond |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  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. | 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 demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | 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 | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | Wochen bis Monate | 1-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-12 | Nutzertraffic | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |