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 Radar |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-5 Tage | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |