View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Decision Tree |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 3-10 | 5-30 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption List | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionTreeOptions | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |