View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation TRIZ |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For technical contradictions or trade-offs, the method looks for solutions that resolve opposing requirements at the same time. It translates limits into an explicit picture of conflict that becomes workable. This produces not just compromises but more elegant principles. | 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 1-2 h | 90-180 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |