View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Operations 5 Whys |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 15-30 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-6 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |