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 Jobs to Be Done |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making Pareto Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. | In many problem situations, effect is distributed unequally across many causes. A Pareto Analysis separates the few drivers with high leverage from the long remainder and focuses attention on what measurably moves the needle. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 Wochen | 45–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Pareto Chart, Top Causes, Focus List |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | CustomerOutcomesNeeds | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | PrioritizationQualityFocusRoot cause |