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 |  Agile WSJF |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  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. | When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together. | 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 | Medium | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-10 | 2-5 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |