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 |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  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. | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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 | 2-8 h | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 5-12 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |