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 |  Innovation Design Charrette |  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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. | 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 | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 10-50 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
