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 Process Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Operations After-Action Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | 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. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 2-5 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ProcessOperationsImprovement | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | LearningOperationsImprovement |