View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Personas |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery Riskiest Assumption Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | 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 an idea hinges on one critical unknown, it prioritizes testing that exact piece of uncertainty first. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritized list of assumptions, a test plan, and a result report. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 Wochen pro Iteration |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-10 Kunden | Nutzertraffic | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Prioritized Assumption List, Test Plan, Results Report |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryAssumptions |