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 |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30-180 min | 30-60 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |