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 |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Innovation Rapid Ideation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | When a decision needs to be prepared quickly, the method generates many solution-close variants in a short time. It deliberately relies on pace to undercut self-censorship and perfectionism. This quickly produces a usable field for prioritization and further work. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | 5-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 4-8 | 4-12 | 1-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Ideenpool, Roh-Shortlist, Cluster |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | BrainstormingIdeationDivergenceSpeed |