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 |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-30 | 10-50 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
