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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Architecture Software Architecture Canvas |  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 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. | The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly. | 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 | 1-2 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 3-12 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Architecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality Attributes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |