methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument 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.In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h45-90 min30-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-121-61-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tags1 shared
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ChangeDecisionStrategy
DecisionTreeOptions
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods