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 Process Mapping |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Operations After-Action Review |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | 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. | After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement. | 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 | Medium | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-6 h | 20-45 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Lessons learned, Action items, Event summary | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | LearningOperationsImprovement | RiskRoot causeSafety |