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 |  Architecture Software Architecture Canvas |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  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. | The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly. | 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 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 | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-10 | 5-30 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Architecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality Attributes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |