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 Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-60 min | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-12 | 6-30 Experten | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |