View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations PDCA Cycle |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For an improvement that still has to prove itself in everyday work, the method runs it through small learning loops. It connects planning, checking, and standardization into a repeatable learning mode. | 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 business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1 h bis mehrere Wochen | 45-90 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-5 | 3-6 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PDCA Log, Experiment Plan, Learning Outcome, Standard Change | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | Continuous improvementLeanExperiments | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |