View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | 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 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 | High | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 15-45 min | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 1-3 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |