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 Option Framing.
Decision Making
Option Framing
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment 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.In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-120 min1-3 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-103-85-304-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsOption Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision InputsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods