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
Paper illustration of Outcome-Driven Innovation with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Outcome-Driven Innovation
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
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 a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability.LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail.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
HighHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
Mehrere Wochen2-6 h3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
2-6 researchers plus sample3-101 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people2-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypothesesFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsLean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checksRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods