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 Tree |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 45-60 min | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 4-12 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionTreeOptions | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | FacilitationOptionsDecision | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |