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 of Team API with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team API
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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 expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 minHalf day initial, dann laufend1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-10Ein Team plus Stakeholder4-123-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsTeam API DocumentAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods