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 User Interviews |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 20-40 min pro Story | 45–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |