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 Fishbone Diagram Gemba Walk

Criterion	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Operations Standard Work Analysis	Operations Fishbone Diagram	Operations Gemba Walk
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.	When a problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers.	When there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions.
Complexitydifferent	Medium	Medium	Low	Low
Timedifferent	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	1-3 h	30-60 min	30-120 min
Participantsdifferent	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	2-6	2-8	2-6
Formatdifferent	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop	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	Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog	Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas
Tagsno overlap	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	LeanProcessQuality	Root causeQualityOperations	LeanObservationProcessOperations

Add more methods