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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60–90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-8 | 3-9 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |