View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 Interviews | 4-12 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |