View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Outcome-Driven InnovationLASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)Design SprintRisk Storming
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 4-5 Tage | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 5-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |