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 |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 4-10 | 5-12 Interviews | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | InnovationPrototypeResearch | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |