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 RAID Log |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-10 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | AutonomyRolesTeam | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |