View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30–60 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
