View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  UX Design Customer Journey Canvas |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When a journey needs to be understood across several phases, it arranges experience, touchpoints, and opportunities into one picture. It makes gaps and friction along the user path clear. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-8 h | 45–90 min | 1-3 h | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-10 | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Customer Journey Canvas, Pain Points, Experience Opportunities | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | JourneyCustomerService designCanvas | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |