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 Empathy Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations Kepner-Tregoe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | For a disturbance that's hard to pin down, the method cleanly separates problem, cause, and decision. It reduces mixing when symptoms allow several interpretations. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45-90 min | 45–90 min | 2-8 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 2-5 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Problem Analysis, Decision Analysis, Risk Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Problem solvingRoot causeDecisionOperations |