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 for RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.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 decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h45-90 min60-120 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
5-303-125-124-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
DecisionRolesGovernance
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods