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 |  Operations Fault Tree Analysis |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For a critical top event with several possible triggers, the method logically models failure paths. It makes visible which combinations of conditions can lead to damage. | 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. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 2-6 h | 45-90 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Fault Tree, Critical Paths, Cause Hypotheses, Control Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | RiskRoot causeSafety | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |