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
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder 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 several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h45-90 min1-2 h60–90 min
Participantsdifferent
5-302-84-122-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
Add more methods