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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 60–90 min | 60-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | FlowVisual managementDelivery | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |