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 |  Innovation Rolestorming |  Innovation SCAMPER |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 search for ideas stalls, switching roles helps people step outside their own perspective and activate new logics of action. The method reduces habit because contributions arise from a different stance. This brings unfamiliar, often fitting solution approaches into play. | For an existing solution under pressure to change, the method deliberately opens space for systematic variants. It directs attention to rebuilding, combining, and repurposing rather than only new basic ideas. This produces concrete evolution paths for products, offerings, or workflows. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-12 | 2-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Rollenkarten, Ideenpool pro Rolle, Konsolidierte Shortlist | SCAMPER Idea List, Concept Shortlist, Variation Notes | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | BrainstormingIdeationCreativity | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityReframingInnovation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |