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 User Interviews |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Innovation Starbursting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 1 participant per interview | 4-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery |