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 |  Innovation SCAMPER |  Innovation Brainstorming |  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. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | 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 | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 30-60 min | 30-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | 2-10 | 4-12 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |