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 |  Delivery Shape Up |  Product Strategy GIST Planning |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | GIST Planning helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities. It links customer value, product logic, and decision priorities, and captures the result as goals, an idea bank, and a step-project list. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | Wochen bis Monate je Goal | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 3-10 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Goals, Idea bank, Step-project list, Tasks, Learning reports | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | RoadmapOutcomesPlanningExperiments | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |