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 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.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.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
10-20 min5-15 min1-2 h60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
4-100+3-204-125-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tags1 shared
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods