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 |  Systems Thinking Soft Systems Methodology |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder 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. | Soft Systems Methodology helps explore unclear or politically charged problems systematically. Instead of forcing a quick answer, the method builds a shared understanding of perspectives and room for action. | 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. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 0.5-3 Tage | 1-2 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 5-15 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Rich Picture, Root Definitions, Conceptual Models, Change Agenda | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | Soft systemsComplexitySensemakingSystems thinking | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |