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 |  Operations Gemba Walk |  Operations After-Action Review |
|---|---|---|---|
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 there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 30-120 min | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-6 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Observation Notes, Improvement Ideas | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | LeanObservationProcessOperations | LearningOperationsImprovement |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
