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 Peer Instruction |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Peer Instruction uses group thinking to clarify difficult terms or concepts faster. The method combines individual reflection with social correction and shared precision. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 10-20 min je Frage | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 6-50 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Concept Questions, Vote Results, Learning Notes | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | LearningDialogueFacilitation | ChangeDecisionStrategy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |