View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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. | 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 | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-90 min pro Feature | 45-90 min | 2-6 h | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 2-5 | 3-10 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |