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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-90 min | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-12 | 2-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |