View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Gemba Walk |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions. | 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. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30-120 min | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 4-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | LeanObservationProcessOperations | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |