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 Assumption Surfacing |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 60-180 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-8 | 4-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | FailureResilienceRisk | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |