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 Fault Tree Analysis |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-6 h | 1-2 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 1-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RiskRoot causeSafety | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | KnowledgeMappingRisk |