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 |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 5-20 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-12 | 3-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | KnowledgeMappingRisk | EstimationEffortRisk | RationaleKnowledgeDecision |