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 User Interviews |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | For an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 1-6 Wochen | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |