View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60–90 min | 10-20 min | 30-60 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-100+ | 4-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |