methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration for Option Framing.
Decision Making
Option Framing
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
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.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.In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30–60 min per interview1-2 h45-120 min30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1 participant per interview2-83-81-6
Formatsame
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Interview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportOption Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision InputsDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List
Tagsno overlap
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison
DecisionTreeOptions
Add more methods