methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
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 a problem keeps recurring and the cause stays unclear, the method exposes the underlying mechanism. It separates symptom, guess, and robust explanation from one another.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
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
20-45 min1-3 h1-4 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-85-303-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Statement, Cause Hypotheses, Confirmed Causes, Action PlanResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Root causeProblem solvingQualityIncident
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods