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 |  Agile Specification by Example |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 60-90 min pro Feature | 1-5 Tage | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-6 | Nutzertraffic | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |