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 Consensus Workshop |  Agile Acceptance Criteria Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Example Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | When a story needs clear checkpoints before implementation, it sharpens expectation and scope together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Acceptance Criteria and a Story Update. | 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. | When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 20-40 min pro Story | 60–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 3-6 | 2-8 | 3-7 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Acceptance Criteria, Story Update | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AgileRequirementsRefinementBehavior-Driven Development | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement |