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 |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Product Discovery Assumption 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min | 60-180 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 4-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |