View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Wizard of Oz Test |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears. | 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. | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-10 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 4-5 Tage | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 5-20 Nutzer | 3-10 Kunden | 5-8 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Prototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk List | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | PrototypeValidationMVP | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | InnovationPrototypeResearch |