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 Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
A structured reflection surfaces what was liked, learned, lacked, and longed for. It is a conversation format and does not validate actions automatically.
Agile
4Ls Retrospective
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Purposedifferent
When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice.When a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min45–75 min1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-10Team members involved4-123-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement ActionsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods