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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Facilitation Expectation 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. | 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. | 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. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 60–90 min | 45-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 3-10 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AutonomyRolesTeam | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |