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 arc42 |  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. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. | 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 | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 1-4 | 1-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | SensemakingDecisionRationale |