View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Example Mapping |  UX Research Personas |  Agile Three Amigos |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | When story, test, and implementation could drift apart, it brings business perspective, engineering, and quality together early. It prevents a story from being read differently only late in the process. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-3 Tage | 15-30 min | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 3-7 | Internes Team | 3 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Clarified Story, Test Examples, Open Questions | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | CollaborationBehavior-Driven DevelopmentQualityRefinement | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |