View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Operations Change Analysis |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-120 min | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-6 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | RiskRoot causeSafety | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |