View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Process Mapping |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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 | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessOperationsImprovement | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |