methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLow
Timedifferent
15-30 min60-120 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-65-124-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Root cause notes, CountermeasuresRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Kepner-Tregoe
Operations
Kepner-Tregoe
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All