View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design. | 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 a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationOptionsDecision | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |