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 User Interviews |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-6 Wochen | 30–60 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 4-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |