View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Kano Model |  Operations Barrier Analysis |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | For a risk that can only be managed through multiple layers of protection, the method examines the effectiveness of each barrier. It shows where safeguards are missing, too weak, or fail under real conditions. | 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 single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 2-4 h | 30–60 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 2-6 | 4-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Barrier Inventory, Failure Analysis per Barrier, Action Backlog | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | Root causeSafetyIncident | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |