View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation How Might We |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 3-10 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | AutonomyRolesTeam | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |