View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery RAID Log |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 20-45 min | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | Based on research question | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | Information architectureNavigationStructure | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |