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
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h30-60 min30-60 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
5-303-102-84-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods