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 |  Knowledge Modeling Feynman Technique |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  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. | The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 20-60 min | 1-2 h | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-5 | 1 | 1-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |