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 Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | 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 | Medium | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | Mehrere Wochen | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 2-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |