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 Double Diamond |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | Mehrere Wochen | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |