View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation How Might We |  UX Research Personas |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | 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 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. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Internes Team | 1 participant per interview | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |