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 Smoke Test |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters 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 | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 h | 60–90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | 4-12 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |