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 |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 | High | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 4-5 Tage | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 5-8 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |