View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |  Engineering Kanban |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. | 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 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 | High | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend | Ongoing | 60–90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-12 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ForecastingFlowDelivery | FlowVisual managementDelivery | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |