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 |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. | 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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer |