View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Operations MORT Analysis |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. | For a safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-5 Tage | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 4-12 | 2-6 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | MORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic Recommendations | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Root causeSafetySystemicIncident | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |