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
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
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 controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min20-45 min0.5-2 Tage
Participantsdifferent
3-108-801-820-500+
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
Add more methods