View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations 5 Whys |  Innovation TRIZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a system should improve while another measure suffers as a result, the method makes the underlying conflict precisely formulable. It separates the desired effect from its side effect. This makes solutions possible that address the contradiction deliberately instead of half-heartedly. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 15-30 min | 1-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 2-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts |
Tagsno overlap | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity |