View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling Teach-back |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |  Knowledge Modeling Feynman Technique |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Teach-back checks whether an explanation actually got through to the other person. The method makes misunderstandings visible early and strengthens shared understanding in advisory and learning situations. | 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. | The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 5-20 min | 45-90 min | 20-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-10 | 1 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Understanding Check, Clarification Notes, Learning Gaps | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements | Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study Notes | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | LearningUnderstandingCommunication | AutonomyRolesTeam | LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |