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 |  Delivery Shape Up |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Half day initial, dann laufend | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Ein Team plus Stakeholder | 2-4 pro Pitch | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Team API Document | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | TeamAlignmentCommunicationService | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | AutonomyRolesTeam | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |