What is the Difference Between MECE and the Logical Thinking Process?

Using MECE, just as any other informal approach at identifying causes, may lead you towards the correct root causes, but there are no assurances.

Recently, a student in my course on how to use AI to assist with logical analysis asked me about the difference between the Logical Thinking Process and the popular MECE (Mutually Exclusive Collectively Exhaustive) consulting framework. I think it is worthwhile to share my answer here:
------------
The main difference is that MECE is intended for breaking a problem up into sub-problems to better organize the work. It assumes the discrete areas are mutually exclusive, while the LTP is based on a systemic approach, each part of the system may influence the others and until the analysis is done we cannot be sure how. With MECE you work with suggested potential causes, while with the LTP you conclude on the root causes based on rigorous logical analysis. Using MECE, just as any other informal approach at identifying causes, may lead you towards the correct root causes, but there are no assurances while the LTP is certain to take you there. The requirement for that to happen is that the logical rules are meticulously followed and that every fact that finds its way into the tree is verified.
As a consultant, I found the LTP to be a breakthrough methodology when I first learnt how to use it in 2018. There is no other analysis framework that comes close when it comes to identifying root causes and finding ways to move away from a damaging paradigm. This is why I'm now devoting most of my time to training people in it.
------------
For those not familiar with the Logical Thinking Process, I'm sharing a diagram of a simple root cause analysis, taken from my book "From Symptoms to Causes - Applying the Logical Thinking Process to an Everyday Problem"