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 a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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.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 a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min1-3 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-83-105-304-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods