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
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
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 a problem keeps recurring and the cause stays unclear, the method exposes the underlying mechanism. It separates symptom, guess, and robust explanation from one another.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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
30-240 min15-45 min1-4 h15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
1-61-33-82-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis SummaryADR File, Decision Log, RationaleProblem Statement, Cause Hypotheses, Confirmed Causes, Action PlanRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Root causeProblem solvingQualityIncident
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods