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 Open Space Technology |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  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 a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order. | 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. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 0.5-2 Tage | 60-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 20-500+ | 3-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |