View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Process Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations After-Action Review |  Operations Gemba Walk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | 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. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30–60 min | 20-45 min | 30-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-8 | 3-12 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | LearningOperationsImprovement | LeanObservationProcessOperations |