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 |  Innovation SCAMPER |  Innovation TRIZ |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 30-60 min | 1-4 h | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 2-10 | 2-8 | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |