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 |  UX Design Design Studio |  UX Research User Interviews |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 designs need to be quickly put in relation to each other, it makes ideas visible and comparable. It encourages early variants instead of long upfront debates. | 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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-3 h | 30–60 min per interview | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-8 | 1 participant per interview | 10-50 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Sketches, Concept Directions, Design Decisions | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SketchingCollaborationIdeation | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |