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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60–90 min | 60-120 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-8 | 5-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |