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 Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Growth A/B Testing |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 1-4 Wochen | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-6 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
