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 of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-4 Wochen60-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
5-301-64-104-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods