methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.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 an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage30-60 min je Interview30–60 min per interview1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
10-505-12 Interviews1 participant per interview3-10 Kunden
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
Add more methods