View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 5-20 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-8 | 3-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | EstimationEffortRisk | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |