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 Personas |  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 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 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 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 | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 1 participant per interview | Internes Team | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |