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 Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 90-180 min | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ChangeDecisionStrategy | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |