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 |  Domain Modeling Domain Context Map |  Domain Modeling Context Map |  UX Research Personas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 domain model and its associated contexts need to be thought through together, it creates a shared overview. It connects the business view and organizational boundary into a readable whole. | When several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 1-3 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-10 | 2-8 | Internes Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Domain Context Map, Boundary Notes, Ownership Map | Context Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary Notes | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Domain-Driven DesignContextBoundaries | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy | ResearchCustomerSynthesis |