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 |  Engineering Golden Path |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 1-3 Tage Setup, laufend | Mehrere Wochen | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 2-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Golden Path Guide, Templates, Quality Checks | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | EngineeringProductivityGovernance | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |