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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
A3 Problem-Solving workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
A3 Problem Solving
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Purposedifferent
When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.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.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
MediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min45-90 min15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
5-122-52-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityA3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause AnalysisRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Kepner-Tregoe
Operations
Kepner-Tregoe
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All