View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Usability Testing |  UX Research Personas |  Product Discovery Concierge MVP |  Innovation Design Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 1-3 Tage | 1-4 Wochen | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | Internes Team | 3-10 Kunden | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Concierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | MVPValidationServiceDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch |