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 Scoring |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Product Discovery Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes. | When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. | When many hypotheses compete for attention, it brings order to their learning sequence and importance. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritization canvas and a hypothesis backlog. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 8-80 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Prioritization Canvas, Hypothesis Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | ExperimentsPrioritizationDiscoveryHypothesis |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
