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 |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  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. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 2-8 | 3-12 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | KnowledgeMappingRisk | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |