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 |  Product Discovery Jobs to Be Done |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 30–60 min per interview | 4-5 Tage | 1-3 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 1 participant per interview | 5-8 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | CustomerOutcomesNeeds |