methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
Paper illustration showing three sorted card stacks and an open question about a possible group.
UX Research
Card Sorting
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
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.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.When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations.When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
30-60 min je Interview1-4 Wochen20-45 min1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
5-12 Interviews3-10 KundenBased on research questionNutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP RisksContent groups, Label set, IA hypothesesClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision
Tagsno overlap
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
Information architectureNavigationStructure
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
Add more methods