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 Soft Systems Methodology |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  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. | Soft Systems Methodology helps explore unclear or politically charged problems systematically. Instead of forcing a quick answer, the method builds a shared understanding of perspectives and room for action. | When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 0.5-3 Tage | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 5-15 | 8-80 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Rich Picture, Root Definitions, Conceptual Models, Change Agenda | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | Soft systemsComplexitySensemakingSystems thinking | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |