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 Knowledge Mapping |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-3 h | 2-8 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 3-12 | 5-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | KnowledgeMappingRisk | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |