View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion | ![]() Systems Thinking CATWOE Analysis | ![]() Knowledge Modeling IBIS | ![]() Facilitation Consensus Workshop | ![]() Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. | 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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 5-30 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |



