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 Solution Interview |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | 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. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 5-10 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |