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 PERT Estimation |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |