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 After-Action Review |  Innovation TRIZ |  Operations 5 Whys |  Operations Learning Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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. | After a project phase with mixed results, the method makes learning from the individual case reusable. It connects events, decisions, and systemic conditions into robust insights. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 1-4 h | 15-30 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-8 | 2-6 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Learning Review Notes, System Factors, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | LearningOperationsImprovement | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | LearningRetrospectiveIncidentOperations |