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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.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.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
LowMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
45-90 min60-120 min45-90 min0.5-2 Tage
Participantsdifferent
3-105-128-8020-500+
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action Topics
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
Add more methods