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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Operations Barrier Analysis |  Facilitation Alignment 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. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | For a risk that can only be managed through multiple layers of protection, the method examines the effectiveness of each barrier. It shows where safeguards are missing, too weak, or fail under real conditions. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 45-90 min | 2-4 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 2-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Barrier Inventory, Failure Analysis per Barrier, Action Backlog | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | Root causeSafetyIncident | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |