View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-90 min | 45–90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 2-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |