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 Decision Tree |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |  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. | For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. | 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 | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 30-90 min | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 1-6 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | DecisionTreeOptions | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |