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
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min1-3 h60-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-101-84-105-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
SensemakingDecisionRationale
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods