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 hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.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 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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h20–45 min60-120 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
5-30Small cross-functional group5-123-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRisk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRisk Matrix, Top Risk List
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
Add more methods