View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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 are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 Interviews | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |