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
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration for Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
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.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog.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
MediumHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-4 h60-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-84-121-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanAnnotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action BacklogArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
RiskDecisionSensemaking
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods