methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
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 many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
2-6 h60-90 min45-90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-82-102-82-8
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control ActionsRICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
RiskRoot causeSafety
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods