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 |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-4 Wochen | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-10 Kunden | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |