View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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 early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 5-15 min | 45-90 min | 20–45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-20 | 2-8 | Small cross-functional group |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning |