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 for Eat the Frog
Operations
Eat the Frog
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
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 method protects energy and attention for the task that creates the largest progress and is often postponed.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h15-90 min daily5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
4-1213-205-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsPriority Task, Completion Note, Daily FocusRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
PrioritizationProductivityFocusExecution
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods