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 |  Delivery Value Stream Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |  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 delivery work dissolves into wait times, handoffs, and hidden effort, Value Stream Mapping makes the actual flow visible. The method exposes bottlenecks, idle time, and feedback loops so lead time and improvement levers become tangible. | 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 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 | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-10 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Current-state map, Future-state map, Bottleneck list | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | LeanFlowWasteDelivery | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |