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 |  Team Design Team API |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | Half day initial, dann laufend | 60–90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Team API Document | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |