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 User Interviews |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 30–60 min per interview | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 1 participant per interview | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
