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 |  Operations Gemba Walk |  Operations PDCA Cycle |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions. | For an improvement that still has to prove itself in everyday work, the method runs it through small learning loops. It connects planning, checking, and standardization into a repeatable learning mode. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 30-120 min | 1 h bis mehrere Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-6 | 1-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas | PDCA Log, Experiment Plan, Learning Outcome, Standard Change | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | LeanObservationProcessOperations | Continuous improvementLeanExperiments | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |