View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Team Design Team API |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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 several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 1-5 Tage | 45-75 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Test Matrix, Test Plan | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |