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 |  Decision Making Option Framing |  UX Research Personas |  Decision Making Decision Framing Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-120 min | 1-3 Tage | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-8 | Internes Team | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions |