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 Process Mapping |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Operations Gemba Walk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | 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 there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 45-90 min | 30-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-5 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | LeanObservationProcessOperations |