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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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 | 60–90 min | 60-120 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 2-8 | 5-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |