A decision matrix was used in order to decide which designs to pursue and is shown in Table 3. In the table, the customer requirements are listed on the left and weighted in terms of importance on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the most important. Each design is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the design completely fulfills the customer requirement and 1 being the design doesn't satisfy the customer requirement. Each rating is multiplied by the customer requirement weighting and added together to create the total score.

As illustrated in Table, the crankset slider design, Q-rings, and improved gear ratios are the three designs that receive the highest score. Due to the patented design of the Q-rings, we decided not to pursue that, but potentially add it to another design. So, the pursued designs will be the crankset slider and the gear ratios. The crankset slider can easily be retrofitted to any bicycle, it would greatly improve torque as opposed to a standard shortened crank arm, would help the knee angle, and is safe for the rider. These benefits caused this design's high score and our selection of this design to pursue. The improvement of gear ratios is very durable, has increased torque capacity, and can easily be retrofitted. These benefits caused its high score and our selection of this design to pursue. The design did receive a 1 in terms of knee angle, because the knee angle is unaffected. However, when paired with a shortened crank arm, it meets this requirement and increases its score.