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 |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 1-2 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |