methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of Barrier Analysis with its method-specific working model.
Operations
Barrier Analysis
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.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.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
2-6 h1-3 h2-4 h1-4 h
Participantsdifferent
3-81-82-63-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control ActionsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleBarrier Inventory, Failure Analysis per Barrier, Action BacklogChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan
Tagsno overlap
RiskRoot causeSafety
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Root causeSafetyIncident
RiskDecisionSensemaking
Add more methods