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 Decision Rights Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Decision Making DACI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 90-180 min | 30–60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 4-12 | 4-8 | 2-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment |