View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  Team Design Team API |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | 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 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. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | Half day initial, dann laufend | 60-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 3-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Team API Document | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |