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 EventStorming |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|
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 consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 2-8 h | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
