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 |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-8 | 2-8 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FailureResilienceRisk | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer |