View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Radar |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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 an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 30-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | FacilitationOptionsDecision |