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 Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 1-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |