View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Assumption SurfacingHypothesis-Driven TroubleshootingFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisFishbone Diagram
| Criterion |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations Fishbone Diagram |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | 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. | When a problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30-240 min | 2-6 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-6 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | Root causeQualityOperations |