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 |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Contradiction Statement, Inventive Principles, Solution Concepts | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | InnovationProblem solvingContradictionsCreativity | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | FacilitationOptionsDecision | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |