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 |  Product Discovery Opportunity Solution Tree |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  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. | When discovery keeps swinging between goals, ideas, and learning loops, it creates clear steering logic. It connects the desired outcome, opportunities, and experiments into a legible structure. | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-2 h Setup, laufend | 30-60 min je Interview | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 2-6 | 5-12 Interviews | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Opportunity Solution Tree, Experiment Backlog, Learning Log | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | DiscoveryOutcomesExperimentsOpportunity | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |