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 Opportunity Interview |  Agile Example Mapping |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | 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 several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30-60 min | 1-5 Tage | 45-75 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-7 | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Test Matrix, Test Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions |