View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Systems Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 5-20 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 1-6 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | EstimationEffortRisk | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |