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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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 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.LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h60-120 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
5-305-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityLean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checksRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods