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 |  Product Discovery Kano Model |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 10-50 | 4-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |