View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Customer Journey MappingAffinity DiagrammingFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisFishbone Diagram
| Criterion |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations Fishbone Diagram |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | 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. | When a problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45–90 min | 2-6 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-10 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | Root causeQualityOperations |