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 illustration for Opportunity Interview
Product Discovery
Opportunity Interview
Paper illustration for Problem Framing Workshop.
Facilitation
Problem Framing Workshop
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities.When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min30-60 min je Interview60-120 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-105-12 Interviews4-105-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsInterview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer QuotesProblem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis QuestionsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer
FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods