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 Problem Interview |  Product Discovery Opportunity Scoring |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30-60 min je Interview | 60-120 min | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 5-12 Interviews | 3-6 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |