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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 1-5 Tage | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 2-6 | Nutzertraffic | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |