View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Delivery RAID Log |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | 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 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 | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 2-6 h | 60–90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-8 | 2-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | RiskRoot causeSafety | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |