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 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  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 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. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-6 h | 15-45 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-10 | 1-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProcessQuality | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |