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 Standard Work Analysis |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Operations Gemba Walk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | 30-60 min je Interview | 30-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-6 | 5-12 Interviews | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | LeanProcessQuality | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | LeanObservationProcessOperations |