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 Standard Work Analysis |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When the same task is done differently depending on the person, the method exposes the reliable core. It creates comparability without unnecessarily choking off needed latitude. | 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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 2-5 | 5-12 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProcessQuality | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |