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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min je Interview | 15-45 min | 1-2 h Setup, laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 Interviews | 1-3 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity |