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 Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Purposedifferent
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.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 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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
90-180 min1-3 h45-90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-125-303-103-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Decision Rights Matrix, AgreementConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision Log
Tagsno overlap
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
DecisionRolesGovernance
Add more methods