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 |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | 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 discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 2-8 h | 45–90 min | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 5-12 | 3-10 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |