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 Leverage Points |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. | 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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | Half day | 45-90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | AutonomyRolesTeam | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |