View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile NoEstimates |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Operations Change Analysis |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. | 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. | For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 60–90 min | 45-120 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-8 | 2-6 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Change Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action List | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |