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 Bottleneck Analysis.
Operations
Bottleneck Analysis
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of HEART Framework with its method-specific working model.
UX Research
HEART Framework
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
For a flow that backs up at one point, the method looks for the capacity limit with the greatest leverage. It explains why extra effort elsewhere barely improves throughput.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.Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h5-15 min120 min initial, dann laufend60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-83-203-65-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Bottleneck Map, Flow Metrics, Improvement Options, Follow-up MeasuresRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistHEART-GSM Table, DashboardRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FlowMeasurementConstraints
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods