View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Agile 4Ls Retrospective |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. | When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45–75 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-5 | Team members involved | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | 4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement Actions | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |