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 |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  UX Design Service Blueprinting |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | When a service experience is spread across several touchpoints, it brings frontstage and backstage together. It shows where user contact and internal responsibility must fit. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-4 h | 0.5-2 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 4-10 | 6-12 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Service Blueprint, Fail Points, Ownership Map | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | JourneyServiceService design | Service designOperationsJourneyBlueprint | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |