View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth North Star Metric |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When product teams track many metrics, the view of the actual customer outcome easily gets lost. A North Star Metric bundles growth, usage, and value contribution into one signal that makes the system's direction visible. | 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 experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. | 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 | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 1-5 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | North Star metric, Input metric tree, Measurement cadence | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | GrowthMetricsAlignmentRetention | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |