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 |  Delivery Shape Up |  Facilitation Stakeholder 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. | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | 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 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 60–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationPrototypeResearch | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |