View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Architecture Architecture Communication Canvas |  Facilitation Storytelling |  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. | The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design. | When an insight needs to have an effect, storytelling translates dry facts into a comprehensible development. It combines context, tension, and consequence into a form that people remember and pass on more easily. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 45-120 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 1-6 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Communication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication Plan | Narrative Outline, Key Message, Story Arc | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas | CommunicationNarrativeStakeholdersFacilitation | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |