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 |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations Eat the Frog |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | The method protects energy and attention for the task that creates the largest progress and is often postponed. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min | 15-90 min daily | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 4-8 | 1 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Priority Task, Completion Note, Daily Focus | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | PrioritizationProductivityFocusExecution | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |