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 |  Decision Making Pareto Analysis |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  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. | In many problem situations, effect is distributed unequally across many causes. A Pareto Analysis separates the few drivers with high leverage from the long remainder and focuses attention on what measurably moves the needle. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30-60 min | 30-60 min | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 1-6 | 2-8 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Pareto Chart, Top Causes, Focus List | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | PrioritizationQualityFocusRoot cause | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |