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 Shape Up |  Delivery Communication Plan |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | When many people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. | 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 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 | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 45-90 min | 30-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-6 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tags1 shared | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |