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 A3 Problem Solving |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Operations MORT Analysis |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | For a safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps. | 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 | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-5 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-6 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | MORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic Recommendations | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | Root causeSafetySystemicIncident | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |