View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Argument MappingARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)IBISArchitecture Decision Record
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 1-3 h | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 2-8 | 1-3 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance |