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 |  Facilitation Barcamp |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance. | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | Halber Tag bis 2 Tage | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 15-200 | 5-12 Interviews | 8-80 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Session Board, Session Notes, Community Learnings | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationLarge groupLearning | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | FacilitationDialogueLarge group |