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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Operations 5 Whys |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 15-30 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-5 | 3-12 | 2-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |