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 Radar |  Operations ABC Analysis |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Dot Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | 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 a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 1-5 | 3-10 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |