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 Fishbowl Discussion |  Facilitation Lean Coffee |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | When a group without a fixed agenda needs to get into useful conversations quickly, Lean Coffee structures the start around interests rather than a presentation. The group itself negotiates which topics get time first and which wait. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 8-80 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Prioritized Topics, Discussion Notes, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationAutonomyDialogue |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
