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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 60-90 min | 1-3 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |