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 Radar |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Decision Making Red Teaming |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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. | 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. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 1-4 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 1-8 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | SensemakingDecisionRationale | RiskDecisionSensemaking | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |