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 Empathy Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min | 60-120 min | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 4-8 | 2-8 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |