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 |  Architecture C4 Model |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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. | 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 | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-4 h | 30–60 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1-5 | 4-8 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |