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 Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
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.When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.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 h30-60 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
4-122-83-205-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tags1 shared
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods