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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper matrix with six colored hat cards for information, feeling, value, caution, ideas and process control.
Facilitation
Six Thinking Hats
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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 a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30-90 min5-15 min45-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-63-204-125-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistPerspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action ItemsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
DecisionTreeOptions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationOptionsDecision
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods