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
A3 Problem-Solving workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
A3 Problem Solving
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
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.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.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
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min1-3 h1-4 Wochen15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
2-55-301-62-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause AnalysisConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods