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 |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30-180 min | 30-240 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 1-6 | 1-6 | 2-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProcessQuality | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations |