View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Value Stream Mapping |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Agile NoEstimates |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When delivery work dissolves into wait times, handoffs, and hidden effort, Value Stream Mapping makes the actual flow visible. The method exposes bottlenecks, idle time, and feedback loops so lead time and improvement levers become tangible. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-60 min | laufend | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 2-8 | 2-12 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Current-state map, Future-state map, Bottleneck list | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | LeanFlowWasteDelivery | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | EstimationForecastingFlow | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |