methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Paper illustration for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h90-180 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
1-84-123-124-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDecision Rights Matrix, AgreementExpectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
SensemakingDecisionRationale
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods