View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Kanban |  Delivery Shape Up |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Delivery Communication Plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work sits in too many parallel streams, throughput suffers and no one sees the bottlenecks. Kanban makes the flow of work visible and limits overload so a system becomes calmer and more predictable. | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | 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 many people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 60–90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | FlowVisual managementDelivery | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning |