View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy Product Canvas |  Operations MORT Analysis |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 safety-relevant event or a system with high protection requirements, the method examines where controls failed. It exposes both technical and organizational gaps. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-6 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Product Canvas, Product Assumptions, Scope Notes | MORT Worksheets, Findings per Branch, Corrective Actions, Systemic Recommendations | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | CanvasDiscoveryScope | Root causeSafetySystemicIncident | RiskRoot causeSafety | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |