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 Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order. | 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. | 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. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 0.5-2 Tage | 1-2 h | 60-120 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 20-500+ | 4-12 | 5-12 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |