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 Context Canvas |  UX Research Personas |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Architecture Quality Attribute Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an environment of users, systems, and constraints is hard to grasp, it puts the context compactly on the table. It creates a clear reading of influence, boundary, and dependency. | 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. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | A Quality Attribute Workshop translates quality requirements into concrete scenarios and architecture impulses. The method brings product, engineering, and operations to the same view of desired properties. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | Internes Team | 4-8 | 5-15 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Context canvas, Open questions, Shared context notes | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Quality Scenarios, Priority List, Architecture Concerns |
Tagsno overlap | ContextFramingRequirementsCanvas | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RequirementsArchitectureWorkshop |