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 Accountability Ladder |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 5-30 | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |