View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Decision Tree |  Decision Making Decision Framing Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch. | When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30–60 min per interview | 30-90 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1 participant per interview | 1-6 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DecisionTreeOptions | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions |