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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Innovation Contradiction Analysis |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 system should improve while another measure suffers as a result, the method makes the underlying conflict precisely formulable. It separates the desired effect from its side effect. This makes solutions possible that address the contradiction deliberately instead of half-heartedly. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 60–90 min | 60-120 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Contradiction Statement, Abstraction Notes, Solution Principles, Concept Ideas | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ContradictionsInnovationProblem solving | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |