View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-5 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |