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 Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
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.When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-90 min45-90 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
4-102-83-205-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods