methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of Team API with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team API
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Paper illustration for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation 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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
Half day initial, dann laufend1-3 h30-60 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
Ein Team plus Stakeholder5-302-83-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Team API DocumentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderExpectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements
Tags1 shared
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
Add more methods