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 Scoring |  UX Research User Interviews |  Innovation Design Sprint |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes. | 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. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 30–60 min per interview | 4-5 Tage | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 1 participant per interview | 5-8 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | InnovationPrototypeResearch |