View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Working Agreements |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Delivery RAID Log |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-12 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | TeamCollaborationAgile | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |