View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Growth A/B Testing |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | 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 | High | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1-4 Wochen | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |