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 Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration for Root Cause Tree Analysis
Operations
Root Cause Tree Analysis
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
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 problem with several suspected causes, the method builds a causal structure instead of a mere list. It makes visible how causes connect and where the strongest points of leverage lie.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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
MediumMediumHighHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-3 h1-4 h2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
1-82-83-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleCause Tree, Evidence Notes, CountermeasuresChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Root causeTreeIncidentQuality
RiskDecisionSensemaking
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods