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 Problem Framing Workshop.
Facilitation
Problem Framing Workshop
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Purposedifferent
When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other.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.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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
60-120 min20-45 min1-3 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-101-85-303-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Problem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods