View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Jobs to Be Done |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought. | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 2-8 h | 45–90 min | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 5-12 | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | CustomerOutcomesNeeds | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |