View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. | 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. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 8-80 | 1-8 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | SensemakingDecisionRationale | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking |