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 |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 45-60 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | ChangeDecisionStrategy | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |