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 |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 2-6 h | 1-5 Tage | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-8 | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | RiskRoot causeSafety | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |