View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Product Discovery Pretotyping |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 1-4 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | ValidationDemandMVP | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |