View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Hypothesis-Driven TroubleshootingAlignment MappingSix Thinking HatsStakeholder Salience Model
| Criterion |  Engineering Hypothesis-Driven Troubleshooting |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When systems fail unexpectedly, spontaneous attempts often produce more noise than insight. Hypothesis-driven Troubleshooting translates symptoms into testable assumptions and makes troubleshooting learnable. | 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 a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-240 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 4-12 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Hypothesis Log, Test Plan, Evidence Notes, Diagnosis Summary | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | TroubleshootingProblem solvingDiagnosis | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationOptionsDecision | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |