View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|
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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1-8 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
