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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Scoring |  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. | 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 opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min per interview | 60-120 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 1 participant per interview | 3-6 | 3-10 Kunden |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks |
Tags1 shared | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery |