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 Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence.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 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.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
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
90-180 min1-3 h1-2 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
3-85-304-123-20
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
CoD Table, Prioritization SequenceConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods