methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of two user profile cards with a goal, behavior evidence, and an open research question.
UX Research
Personas
Gemba Walk workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
Gemba Walk
Paper illustration for Standard Work Analysis.
Operations
Standard Work Analysis
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects 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 there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions.When the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude.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
MediumLowMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 Tage30-120 min1-3 h2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
Internes Team2-62-63-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario NotesObservation Notes, Improvement IdeasStandard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training NeedsFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
ResearchCustomerSynthesis
LeanObservationProcessOperations
LeanProcessQuality
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods