View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:A3 Problem SolvingStakeholder Salience ModelArchitecture Decision RecordStakeholder Mapping
| Criterion |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. | 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-90 min | 15-45 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-5 | 3-6 | 1-3 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |