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 World Café |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Decision Making Decision Rights 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. | When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity. | 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 60-180 min | 60-90 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 12-100+ | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Table Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |