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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper matrix with six colored hat cards for information, feeling, value, caution, ideas and process control.
Facilitation
Six Thinking Hats
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together.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
30-90 min45-90 min45-90 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-63-104-124-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsPerspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action ItemsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
DecisionTreeOptions
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationOptionsDecision
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods