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 Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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 | 1-3 h | 5-15 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | 5-30 | 3-20 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |