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 |  Delivery Shape Up |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Delivery Communication Plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 60–90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning |