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 User Interviews |  UX Research Personas |  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 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 Tage | 30-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview | Internes Team | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | LeanObservationProcessOperations |