View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Team Design Team API |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document. | 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. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 1-2 h | 2-5 min je Item | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 4-12 | 3-9 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |