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 User Interviews |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min per interview | 15-45 min | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1 participant per interview | 1-3 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer |