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 Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Architecture Communication Canvas method illustration showing its working structure
Architecture
Architecture Communication Canvas
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
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.The Architecture Communication Canvas plans architecture communication so the right people receive the right message. The method turns technical complexity into deliberate communication design.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h60-120 min60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
4-122-85-123-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsCommunication Canvas, Stakeholder Messages, Architecture Communication PlanRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
ArchitectureCommunicationStakeholdersCanvas
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods