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 Working Backwards |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When the target state and benefit need to be clear first, it thinks backward from the desired outcome into the product logic. It sharpens vision, objections, and value proposition before elaboration. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters 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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 4-8 h, mehrere Iterationen | 60–90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 2-8 | 1-6 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Future Press Release, FAQ, Vision Statement | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | VisionNarrativeAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |