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 NoEstimates.
Agile
NoEstimates
Paper illustration for PERT Estimation.
Decision Making
PERT Estimation
Paper illustration for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Purposedifferent
When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules.On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighHigh
Timedifferent
laufend15-45 min2-6 h2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
2-121-83-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing RulesPERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk NotesFault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control ActionsFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
EstimationForecastingFlow
EstimationUncertaintyRisk
RiskRoot causeSafety
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods