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 Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | For an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly. | 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. | 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 | High | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 1-6 Wochen | 15-45 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 4-10 | 1-3 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |