View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Operations Accountability Ladder |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 20-45 min | 10-30 min je Item | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 1-8 | 1-8 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |