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
A paper-based illustration representing Product Canvas with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Strategy
Product Canvas
Paper illustration for Fault Tree Analysis.
Operations
Fault Tree Analysis
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Purposedifferent
When product goal and feature scope don't yet fit cleanly together, it creates a shared working picture. It connects need, core features, and assumptions into a solid starting point.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.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.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
MediumHighLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 h2-6 h45-90 min2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-82-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Product Canvas, Product Assumptions, Scope NotesFault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control ActionsAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions
Tagsno overlap
CanvasDiscoveryScope
RiskRoot causeSafety
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Add more methods