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 Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
Paper illustration for World Café.
Facilitation
World Café
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
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.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.When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity.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
LowHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min0.5-2 Tage60-180 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-1020-500+12-100+3-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action TopicsTable Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared QuestionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods