View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Operations Gemba Walk |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | When there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-120 min | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-6 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | LeanObservationProcessOperations | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |