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 User Interviews |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-120 min | 30–60 min | 30–60 min per interview | 2-8 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 4-8 | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | LeanObservationProcessOperations | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop |