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 Decision Framing Workshop.
Decision Making
Decision Framing Workshop
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins.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.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min45-90 min20-45 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
4-103-101-85-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence PlanResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods