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 Expectation Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 45-90 min | 15-45 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 3-12 | 1-3 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |