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 |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |  Growth A/B Testing |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 20–45 min | 1-4 Wochen | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | Small cross-functional group | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |