View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 60-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 4-10 | 3-6 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | InnovationPrototypeResearch | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |