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 |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | 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. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 2-4 h | 60-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-8 | 3-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |