View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation TRIZ |  Growth A/B Testing |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When a system should improve while another measure suffers as a result, the method makes the underlying conflict precisely formulable. It separates the desired effect from its side effect. This makes solutions possible that address the contradiction deliberately instead of half-heartedly. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 1-4 Wochen | 45-90 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving |