methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Criterion
Paper illustration for Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting.
Engineering
Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Gemba Walk workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
Gemba Walk
Paper illustration for Fault Isolation.
Engineering
Fault Isolation
Purposedifferent
When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.When there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
30-240 min15-45 min30-120 min30-180 min
Participantsdifferent
1-61-32-61-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis SummaryADR File, Decision Log, RationaleObservation Notes, Improvement IdeasFault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area
Tagsno overlap
TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
LeanObservationProcessOperations
TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering
Add more methods