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 |  Delivery Cost of Delay |  Delivery MoSCoW |  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. | Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence. | When a release carries too many demands and priorities are only ever negotiated, MoSCoW creates clear boundaries for the next cut. Must, Should, Could, and Won't make commitment, room for maneuver, and trade-off logic visible to everyone involved. | 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 | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 90-180 min | 30-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | CoD Table, Prioritization Sequence | Prioritized Backlog, Release Scope, Tradeoff Notes | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision | PrioritizationScopeDecision | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |