View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Kano Model |  Product Discovery Jobs to Be Done |  UX Research Personas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 Wochen | 1-3 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 10-50 | 5-12 Interviews | Internes Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | CustomerOutcomesNeeds | ResearchCustomerSynthesis |