View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk 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. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 5-20 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-8 | 3-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | SensemakingDecisionRationale | EstimationEffortRisk | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |