View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Decision Rights MappingAlignment MappingArchitecture Decision RecordStakeholder Salience Model
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 90-180 min | 1-2 h | 15-45 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-12 | 1-3 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |