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 a participant using a prototype while an observer takes notes beside a highlighted usability issue.
UX Research
Usability Testing
Paper illustration for Solution Interview
Product Discovery
Solution Interview
Paper illustration for Wizard of Oz Test
Product Discovery
Wizard of Oz Test
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
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 a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation.When a new experience would still be too expensive to automate for real, it simulates the outcome behind the scenes. It checks user reaction and value before the technology disappears.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h je Session30-60 min je Interview2-10 Tage1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question5-10 Interviews5-20 Nutzer3-10 Kunden
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Usability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsSolution Feedback, Objection List, Validation NotesPrototype Learnings, Manual Effort Notes, Risk ListConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP Risks
Tags1 shared
ValidationUXPrototype
ValidationInterviewsPrototype
PrototypeValidationMVP
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
Add more methods