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 Kaizen Event |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a tightly scoped process segment with noticeable waste, the method bundles shared energy for change. It suits situations that call for fast learning loops and visible adjustments. | 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 complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 0.5-5 Tage | 30–60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 4-8 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Kaizen Charter, Waste List, Improvement Experiments, Standard Work Update | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | LeanContinuous improvementOperations | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |