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
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
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.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h90-180 min1-4 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-84-123-82-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDecision Rights Matrix, AgreementChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tags1 shared
SensemakingDecisionRationale
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
RiskDecisionSensemaking
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods