View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Delphi Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 2-8 | 6-30 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy |