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 Strategy KPI Tree |  UX Research User Interviews |  Engineering Goal Question Metric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 metrics across the organization drift apart, it arranges drivers and effects under one shared logic. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a KPI tree and owner list. | 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. | Helps clarify technical problems, hypotheses, and next steps in concrete terms. It breaks a technical problem into testable parts. The result is captured as a GQM table and metric briefs. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 90-180 min initial, dann laufend | 30–60 min per interview | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 1 participant per interview | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | KPI Tree, Owner List | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | GQM Table, Metric Profiles |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | MetricsStrategyAlignmentMeasurement | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment |