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 Thinking |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |  Product Discovery Assumption 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. | 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 experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 30-60 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-10 | 1-5 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |