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 Futures Wheel |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-3 h | 60–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-30 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |