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 Empathy Mapping |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 Kunden | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
