View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-8 | 1-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | SensemakingDecisionRationale | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | RationaleKnowledgeDecision |