View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Personas |  Operations ABC Analysis |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | 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 complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30-60 min | 30–60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 1-5 | 4-8 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |