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 Team Charter |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. | 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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 60-90 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-8 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCollaboration | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |