View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Innovation Lean Startup |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | For uncertain business assumptions, the method forces the idea into contact with real market reactions early. It separates wishful picture, assumption, and observable behavior, so that learning becomes faster than planning. This translates uncertainty into measurable insight. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-180 min | Wochen bis Monate je Lernzyklus | 30-240 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 1-6 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | Hypothesis list, MVPs, Learning reports, Pivot or persevere decision | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | LeanStartupValidationMVP | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |