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 Contextual Inquiry |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 15-45 min | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 1-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
