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 ICE Scoring |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 | Low | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |