View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Service BlueprintingRoot Cause AnalysisAffinity DiagrammingFailure Mode and Effects Analysis
| Criterion |  UX Design Service Blueprinting |  Operations Root Cause Analysis |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a service experience is spread across several touchpoints, it brings frontstage and backstage together. It shows where user contact and internal responsibility must fit. | When a problem keeps recurring and the cause stays unclear, the method exposes the underlying mechanism. It separates symptom, guess, and robust explanation from one another. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 | High | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 0.5-2 Tage | 1-4 h | 45–90 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 6-12 | 3-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Service Blueprint, Fail Points, Ownership Map | Problem Statement, Cause Hypotheses, Confirmed Causes, Action Plan | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | Service designOperationsJourneyBlueprint | Root causeProblem solvingQualityIncident | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |