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 |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  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. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-12 | 2-8 | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | KnowledgeMappingRisk | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer |