View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. | 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 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-75 min | 45-90 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Test Matrix, Test Plan | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |