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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of a Test Card with four fields for hypothesis, test, metric, and success threshold.
Product Discovery
Test Card
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.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.The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success.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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h60-120 min20-35 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
4-125-121-53-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityTest Card with a pre-set thresholdRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods