View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Facilitation Question Burst |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | When a problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation. | 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 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 | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 15-30 min | 60-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 4-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning Prompts | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |