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 |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | 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 h | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |