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 Thinking |  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. | 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. | 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 | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 1-3 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch | CustomerOutcomesNeeds |