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 Contextual Inquiry |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-8 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | FailureResilienceRisk | KnowledgeMappingRisk | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |