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 Kano Model |  Product Discovery Context Canvas |  UX Research HEART Framework |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | When an environment of users, systems, and constraints is hard to grasp, it puts the context compactly on the table. It creates a clear reading of influence, boundary, and dependency. | Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard. | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 45-90 min | 120 min initial, dann laufend | 1-3 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 3-10 | 3-6 | 4-12 Beobachtungen |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Context canvas, Open questions, Shared context notes | HEART-GSM Table, Dashboard | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | ContextFramingRequirementsCanvas | MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction | UX researchObservationContext |