Liberating Structures Tier List

What Liberating Structures are

If you don’t already know them, Liberating Structures are 33 simple building blocks you can combine to design workshops that help groups do their best thinking together. They work by making participation easier and by reducing the implicit power differences that show up in group settings.

How I use them

I use Liberating Structures almost every day in my work. I’ve been using them for close to nine years, across policy, data, and technical delivery teams of all shapes and sizes. I’ve used every structure in the core set, as well as some experimental ones not covered here.

For me, they are the most reliable way to get a group to think deeply together. As a delivery manager, one of my responsibilities is creating the conditions for people and teams to do their best thinking. Liberating Structures are a big part of how I do that.

Why I made this list

I created this tier list as a reflection exercise for myself. It’s just a snapshot of how I think about these structures right now, based on how they show up in my work, and I expect it to change as my role and context evolve.

Doing this surprised me. It made me notice the structures I rely on most, and others that I’ve let gather a bit too much dust. I’ve already made a plan to revisit some of those, because there are plenty of conversations happening right now where they could be useful.

I also hope this list acts as a provocation. If you use Liberating Structures, you will almost certainly see them differently to me. That difference is valuable. I’d love this to prompt discussion and the sharing of experience.

My method

When I reflected on why I value Liberating Structures so highly, it came down to four characteristics:

• Ease of use - how hard it is to run well
• Teachability - whether others can pick it up and use it
• Reliability - how often something genuinely useful emerges
• Depth when it lands - how far the conversation and motivation shift when it works

I scored each structure from 1 to 3 against each of these characteristics, then looked at the patterns that emerged. The tiers are a summary of those patterns, rather than a precise ranking, which is why I’m not sharing the spreadsheet. 😉

The list itself

One thing I found interesting was the overall distribution of the list. Some structures I expected to sit higher didn’t, and others felt more valuable than I’d realised.

I think this is where the building block nature of Liberating Structures really matters. Each structure has a clear purpose. Used on its own, it can take you from one place to another.

But the work we do in creative and technical environments is rarely linear. If it were as simple as “we are here, now we need to be there”, we probably wouldn’t need facilitation at all. Often there are many steps between those points, and the right move isn’t always obvious at the start.

The real value comes from how you combine structures together into a sequence that helps people think, reflect, and be intentional about moving forward. Designing these strings is a skill in its own right, and it’s where facilitation starts to look a lot like leadership.

An example

In October 2025, I designed a workshop for a community of practice to reflect on their work over the year.

One option would have been to run a straightforward idea-generation session using 1-2-4-All, or even better, a What, So What, Now What? retrospective. That would have produced a useful output, but the thinking would likely have stayed fairly shallow.

Instead, I designed a sequence made up of:

Ecocycle Planning → What, So What, Now What? → Nine Whys → Purpose to Practice

It took more effort to run, but the difference in outcome was significant. The group developed a shared understanding of the system they were working in, learned more about each other, and left with clear, intentional commitments about how to move forward. The energy and motivation at the end of the session were noticeably higher.

Writing this example made me realise that it would be useful to capture some of the structure “strings” I use most often, and why I combine them in different situations. I’ve added that idea to my open backlog.

With that context in mind, here’s how the tiers break down.

S Tier

This is where the structures live that consistently create high value for me. Teaching these to teams almost always pays off.

A user researcher using What, So What, Now What? after analysis, or a product manager getting to the real issue through Nine Whys, makes day-to-day work much easier. Purpose to Practice, in particular, is one of the most reliable ways I know to kick off an initiative with shared clarity and motivation.

Everything in this tier works well both remotely and in person, and usually takes very little time to prepare. The biggest factor in success is the quality of the invitation question.

A Tier

This tier contains two broad types of structure.

Some are individually valuable but work best when they’re part of a wider sequence, for example, 1-2-4-All or 15% Solutions. Others, such as Discovery & Action Dialogue or Making Space with TRIZ, are more self-contained and can stand on their own.

These are structures I reach for often, and trust, but they might be a little harder to teach, or rely on more effort in order to get the real value out of them.

B Tier

Almost everything here is independently useful, but tends to require more care to run well.

Some have a higher social or energy cost, like Improv Prototyping or Celebrity Interview. Others rely on metaphor or framing that takes time to explain before people can fully engage.

This part of the list also includes several structures that lean more heavily on role-play, improvisation, or performance. I know these can feel uncomfortable for many people, they certainly did for me at first.

That discomfort doesn’t mean they’re ineffective. Play is well evidenced as a powerful way to support learning and reflection, even in adult groups. With the right framing, care, and psychological safety, there’s plenty of space for this kind of work in professional settings.

C Tier

These are all good structures, but in my experience they are the most dependent on timing, context, and group readiness. They’re not where I usually start, but they can still be effective in the right moment.

Some of their lower placement is likely a reflection of my own practice rather than the structures themselves. In particular, it’s made me reflect on two things.

First, how well I help people recognise when a structure exists for the problem they’re facing. If someone has a “What I Need From You” type issue, there is already a ready-made structure that can help, but only if people know it’s there.

Second, how accessible I make these structures in practice. That might be through better workshop design, clearer invitations, or simply using them more often so teams become familiar with them.

‘Showing the thing’ isn’t just a technique for building software with your users. It can be about showing people alternative ways of having great discussions, meetings and workshops too.

I’m planning to work on this deliberately over the coming months, as part of improving my own craft.

Workshop design is a leadership skill

Using Liberating Structures well isn’t just about knowing the individual activities. The real craft is in how you design and combine them to move a group from an initial invitation to clear, motivated intention.

Facilitation is an important leadership skill. Liberating Structures help make that skill accessible to all, but it’s learning how to design thoughtful sequences that really makes the difference between good leaders and great leaders.

Getting this right makes you more open, more collaborative, and helps people understand your direction even more clearly. You’ll notice people change how they approach, trust, and work with you. You’ll probably have fun along the way too.