View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-8 h | 45–90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-10 | 3-10 Kunden | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |