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 of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of MORT Analysis with its method-specific working model.
Operations
MORT Analysis
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Purposedifferent
DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.For a safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowHighLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 hMehrere Tage bis Wochen45-90 min2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
2-82-62-83-8
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportMORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic RecommendationsAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanFault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions
Tagsno overlap
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
Root causeSafetySystemicIncident
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
RiskRoot causeSafety
Add more methods