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 Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |