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
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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.In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.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 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
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min20–45 min60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
4-10Small cross-functional group5-123-20
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRisk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods