methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door 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.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.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30-60 min je Interview1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
5-12 Interviews3-10 KundenNutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP RisksClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision
Tags2 shared
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of Experiment Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Experiment Canvas
Paper illustration of a Learning Card with four fields for hypothesis, observation, insight, and action.
Product Discovery
Learning Card
Paper illustration of MVP Test Matrix with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
MVP Test Matrix
Paper illustration of Riskiest Assumption Test with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Riskiest Assumption Test