View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 60-90 min | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |