View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Solo Brainstorming |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For an individual thinking problem with no counterpart immediately available, the method creates a protected space for one's own approaches. It prevents outside opinions from narrowing thinking too early. This lets ideas mature before they go into a group format. | 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. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-60 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 | 1-8 | 3-20 Reviewer | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Personal Idea List, Sketches or Mind Map, Pre-Read for Group Session | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeationAsync | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |