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 |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations Barrier Analysis |  Operations MORT Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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. | For a safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min | 2-4 h | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 4-8 | 2-6 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Barrier Inventory, Failure Analysis per Barrier, Action Backlog | MORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic Recommendations |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Root causeSafetyIncident | Root causeSafetySystemicIncident |