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 |  Delivery RAID Log |  Operations 5 Whys |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 15-30 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 2-6 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |