Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Selected:Fishbone Diagram ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)5 Whys Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Criterion	Operations Fishbone Diagram	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Operations 5 Whys	Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Purposedifferent	When a problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers.	ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.	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 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.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Medium	Low	High
Timedifferent	30-60 min	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	15-30 min	2-6 h
Participantsdifferent	2-8	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	2-6	3-10
Formatdifferent	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Root cause notes, Countermeasures	FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap	Root causeQualityOperations	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving	RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause

Add more methods