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 Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Purposedifferent
When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.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 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.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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h20-45 min1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-81-84-123-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods