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 Opportunity Interview |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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 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 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 45–90 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 | 5-12 Interviews | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |