View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  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. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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 | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 2-5 | 3-20 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |