View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Product Discovery Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When many hypotheses compete for attention, it brings order to their learning sequence and importance. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritization canvas and a hypothesis backlog. | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 60-90 min | 30–60 min per interview | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-8 | 1 participant per interview | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Prioritization Canvas, Hypothesis Backlog | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ExperimentsPrioritizationDiscoveryHypothesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |