View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Growth A/B Testing |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60–90 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic | 1-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |