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 |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Operations Barrier Analysis |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | For a risk that can only be managed through multiple layers of protection, the method examines the effectiveness of each barrier. It shows where safeguards are missing, too weak, or fail under real conditions. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1-2 h | 2-4 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-12 | 2-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Barrier Inventory, Failure Analysis per Barrier, Action Backlog | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | Root causeSafetyIncident | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |