View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Dot Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | Mehrere Wochen | 60-120 min | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 5-12 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |