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 of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Paper illustration of Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
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.When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice.In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h45-90 min45-90 min90-180 min
Participantsdifferent
5-303-103-124-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasDelegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogDecision Rights Matrix, Agreement
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AutonomyRolesTeam
DecisionRolesGovernance
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
Add more methods