View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Operations A3 Problem Solving |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-5 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |