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 |  UX Research User Interviews |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  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. | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |