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 Research Usability Testing |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down. | 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. | When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 h je Session | 30–60 min per interview | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | Based on research question | 1 participant per interview | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | ValidationUXPrototype | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |