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 session grid with two time blocks, three rooms, colored session cards and an open topic pool.
Facilitation
Barcamp
Paper illustration for Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
Paper illustration for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
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 many people can contribute knowledge and the flow should stay open, Barcamp provides a framework for self-organized sessions. The format channels energy without defining the content too narrowly in advance.When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
45-90 minHalber Tag bis 2 Tage0.5-2 Tage45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-1015-20020-500+3-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsSession Board, Session Notes, Community LearningsSession Marketplace, Proceedings, Action TopicsDelegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements
Tagsno overlap
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationLarge groupLearning
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
AutonomyRolesTeam
Add more methods