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 Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
A structured reflection surfaces what was liked, learned, lacked, and longed for. It is a conversation format and does not validate actions automatically.
Agile
4Ls Retrospective
Paper illustration for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
Paper illustration for Mad Sad Glad
Agile
Mad Sad Glad
Purposedifferent
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 sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time.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 a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min45–75 min45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-10Team members involved3-103-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement ActionsDelegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsEmotion Board, Themes, Action Items
Tags1 shared
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam
AutonomyRolesTeam
RetrospectiveTeamReflection
Add more methods