View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-10 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |