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 |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 45-90 min | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 4-10 | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |