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 Kaizen Event |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For a tightly scoped process segment with noticeable waste, the method bundles shared energy for change. It suits situations that call for fast learning loops and visible adjustments. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 0.5-5 Tage | 45–90 min | 30–60 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-10 | 4-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kaizen Charter, Waste List, Improvement Experiments, Standard Work Update | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | LeanContinuous improvementOperations | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |