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 Problem Interview |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 2-10 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden | 4-10 | 5-20 Nutzer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch | PrototypeValidationMVP |