View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Visual Management |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With high tempo and many parallel topics, the method makes status, deviations, and priorities visible at a glance. It reduces search effort and prevents what matters from getting lost in daily work. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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 | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 60–90 min | 60-120 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-20 | 2-8 | 5-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Visual Board, Status Indicators, Exception Cues | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | SignalsOperationsVisual management | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |