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 |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | 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. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 4-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |