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 World Café |
|---|---|---|---|
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 needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 8-80 | 12-100+ |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
