View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Personas |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-3 h | 20–45 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 2-8 | Small cross-functional group | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning | SensemakingDecisionRationale |