View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Fault Isolation |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In technical failures, the visible symptom often gets mixed up with the actual cause. Fault Isolation narrows the fault space and progressively reduces which part of the system is truly affected. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-180 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Fault Isolation Map, Test Log, Excluded Hypotheses, Narrowed Fault Area | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | TroubleshootingDiagnosisEngineering | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |