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 |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-8 h | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-90 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 5-12 Interviews | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |