View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Business Strategy Ansoff Matrix |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. | 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. | The Ansoff Matrix organizes growth options by market and product relation. It helps weigh expansion, diversification, and adaptation cleanly against each other. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 45-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people | 2-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Ansoff Matrix, Growth Options, Risk Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | GrowthStrategyMarketPortfolio | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation |