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 |  Delivery Cost of Delay |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder 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. | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. | 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 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 90-180 min | 1-2 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 3-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |