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 |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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 | Medium | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | Mehrere Wochen | 15-45 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-3 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | SensemakingDecisionRationale |