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 Kano Model |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 h | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |