View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 4-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 2-10 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 5-8 | 3-10 Kunden | 5-20 Nutzer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | PrototypeValidationMVP |