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 |  Agile NoEstimates |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | laufend | 1-3 h | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-12 | 2-8 | 1-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | EstimationForecastingFlow | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | ForecastingFlowDelivery |