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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  Operations MORT Analysis |  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. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | For a safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-6 | 2-6 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | MORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic Recommendations | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | Root causeSafetySystemicIncident | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |