View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Standard Work Analysis |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude. | 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 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 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 Interviews | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProcessQuality | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |