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 Pretotyping |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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 | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 45-60 min | 2-6 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-4 | 2-8 | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationDemandMVP | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |