View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Context Canvas |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an environment of users, systems, and constraints is hard to grasp, it puts the context compactly on the table. It creates a clear reading of influence, boundary, and dependency. | When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order. | 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 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 | Low | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 20-500+ | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Context canvas, Open questions, Shared context notes | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | ContextFramingRequirementsCanvas | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |