View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations DMAIC |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Decision Making Pareto Analysis |  Operations Eat the Frog |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For a process problem with fluctuating performance, the method brings analysis and improvement into a disciplined sequence. It creates a framework in which numbers, causes, and control come together. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | In many problem situations, effect is distributed unequally across many causes. A Pareto Analysis separates the few drivers with high leverage from the long remainder and focuses attention on what measurably moves the needle. | The method protects energy and attention for the task that creates the largest progress and is often postponed. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-12 Wochen | 5-15 min | 30-60 min | 15-90 min daily |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-20 | 1-6 | 1 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Project Charter, Measurement Plan, Cause Analysis, Control Plan | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Pareto Chart, Top Causes, Focus List | Priority Task, Completion Note, Daily Focus |
Tagsno overlap | Continuous improvementQualityProcess improvement | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | PrioritizationQualityFocusRoot cause | PrioritizationProductivityFocusExecution |