Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Selected:ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Standard Work Analysis A3 Problem Solving 5 Whys

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Operations Standard Work Analysis	Operations A3 Problem Solving	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.	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 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.	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	Medium	Medium	Low
Timedifferent	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	1-3 h	45-90 min	15-30 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	2-6	2-5	2-6
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs	A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis	Root cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	LeanProcessQuality	LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations	Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving

Add more methods