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 Process Mapping |  Operations After-Action Review |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 20-45 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training Needs | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProcessQuality | ProcessOperationsImprovement | LearningOperationsImprovement | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |