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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
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.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h30-90 min45-90 min1-4 h
Participantsdifferent
1-81-62-83-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan
Tags1 shared
SensemakingDecisionRationale
DecisionTreeOptions
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
RiskDecisionSensemaking
Add more methods