View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Personas |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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. | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 45-90 min | 30–60 min per interview | 45-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 2-8 | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions |