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 ALPEN Method
Operations
ALPEN Method
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of an activity-role table with clear RACI assignments and one highlighted accountable role per activity.
Operations
RACI Matrix
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Purposedifferent
With an overloaded day full of too many tasks, a realistic picture of the day emerges. The method connects estimating, deciding, and buffer thinking so planning fits available energy and time.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.With unclear responsibilities across several roles or areas, the method creates unambiguous accountability logic. It reduces friction because decision, execution, contribution, and information become separately visible.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
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
10-20 min daily1-3 h45-90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
15-302-83-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Daily Plan, Time Estimates, Review NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRACI Matrix, Responsibility Map, Decision NotesResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
PlanningTime managementProductivityOperations
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RolesResponsibilityGovernanceOperations
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods