View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Lean Startup |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | 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. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus | 30-240 min | 1-5 Tage | Stunden bis wenige Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Hypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decision | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision |
Tagsno overlap | LeanStartupValidationMVP | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ValidationDemandMVP |