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 of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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 shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
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.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.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 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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h30-60 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-303-101 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListLean 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 checksRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods