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 of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper session grid with two time blocks, three rooms, colored session cards and an open topic pool.
Facilitation
Barcamp
Paper illustration for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
Purposedifferent
Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely.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 many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 minHalber Tag bis 2 Tage45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-1015-2003-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsSession Board, Session Notes, Community LearningsDelegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationLarge groupLearning
AutonomyRolesTeam
Add more methods