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
Paper illustration for 8D Problem Solving.
Operations
8D Problem Solving
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Pareto Analysis
Decision Making
Pareto Analysis
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
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 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.In many problem situations, effect is distributed unequally across many causes. A Pareto Analysis separates the few drivers with high leverage from the long remainder and focuses attention on what measurably moves the needle.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-6 Wochen60-120 min30-60 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
4-105-121-63-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action PlanRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityPareto Chart, Top Causes, Focus ListRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
QualityProblem solvingRoot cause
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
PrioritizationQualityFocusRoot cause
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods