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 5 Whys |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Architecture arc42 |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | 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 | 15-30 min | 30-240 min | 1-2 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 1-6 | 1-4 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |