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 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 | High | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1-6 Wochen | 45–90 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-10 | 3-10 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tags1 shared | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |