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 Soft Systems Methodology.
Systems Thinking
Soft Systems Methodology
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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.Soft Systems Methodology helps explore unclear or politically charged problems systematically. Instead of forcing a quick answer, the method builds a shared understanding of perspectives and room for action.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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
LowHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min0.5-3 Tage60-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-105-154-105-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsRich Picture, Root Definitions, Conceptual Models, Change AgendaProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Soft systemsComplexitySensemakingSystems thinking
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods