View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Fishbone DiagramSpecification by ExampleFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisFault Tree Analysis
| Criterion |  Operations Fishbone Diagram |  Agile Specification by Example |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a problem has several possible contributing factors, the method sorts causes by cause areas. It prevents an initial hunch from blocking the view of other plausible drivers. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 60-90 min pro Feature | 2-6 h | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-10 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fishbone Diagram, Cause Categories, Investigation Backlog | Example Table, Acceptance Tests | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions |
Tagsno overlap | Root causeQualityOperations | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | RiskRoot causeSafety |