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 |  Delivery RAID Log |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 60–90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | RiskRoot causeSafety | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |