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 |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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 | Medium | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | Mehrere Wochen | 60–90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |