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 of RAID Log with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Delivery
RAID Log
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration of MVP Test Matrix with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
MVP Test Matrix
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting.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 several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan.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
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30 min Setup, dann laufend30–60 min per interview45-75 min1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone1 participant per interview2-8Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopAsync
Outputdifferent
RAID Log, Status Report SourceInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryTest Matrix, Test PlanClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision
Tagsno overlap
RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
Add more methods