View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations Standard Work Analysis |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | When the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 2-6 h | 1-3 h | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 2-6 | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | LeanProcessQuality | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |