methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Standard Work Analysis.
Operations
Standard Work Analysis
Paper illustration for Three-Point Estimation.
Decision Making
Three-Point Estimation
Paper illustration for PERT Estimation.
Decision Making
PERT Estimation
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
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.A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes.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 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
MediumMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h10-30 min je Item15-45 min2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
2-61-81-83-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Standard Work Sheet, Deviation List, Improved Standard, Training NeedsThree-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesPERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk NotesFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
LeanProcessQuality
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
EstimationUncertaintyRisk
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods