methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Criterion
Paper illustration of Competency Questions with its method-specific working model.
Knowledge Modeling
Competency Questions
Gemba Walk workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
Gemba Walk
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Paper illustration for Standard Work Analysis.
Operations
Standard Work Analysis
Purposedifferent
Competency Questions translate a domain model into concrete questions that it must be able to answer. The method keeps the model's scope clean and prevents pretty but useless structures.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighMedium
Timedifferent
2-4 h30-120 min2-6 h1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-82-63-102-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Competency Question Set, Required Concepts, Test Queries, Coverage MatrixObservation Notes, Improvement IdeasFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsStandard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs
Tagsno overlap
OntologyKnowledge graphScopeRequirementsSemantic
LeanObservationProcessOperations
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
LeanProcessQuality
Add more methods