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
Context Map workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Domain Modeling
Context Map
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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 several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min1-3 h45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-102-83-104-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsContext Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary NotesResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods