View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Outcome-Driven InnovationFault Tree AnalysisFailure Mode and Effects AnalysisATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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. | ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation. |
Complexitysame | High | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Wochen | 2-6 h | 2-6 h | Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope |
Participantsdifferent | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-8 | 3-10 | Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations |
Tagsno overlap | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | RiskRoot causeSafety | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders |