View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Operations Accountability Ladder |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 20-45 min | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |