View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Jobs to Be Done |  Facilitation Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought. | When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 0.5-2 Tage | 60–90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 20-500+ | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity List | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | CustomerOutcomesNeeds | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |