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 Option Framing |  Product Strategy DIBB |  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. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-120 min | 1-2 h | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-8 | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | DecisionTreeOptions |