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
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
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.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 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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h5-15 min60-120 min60–90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-123-205-122-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes
Tags1 shared
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
Add more methods