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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 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 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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
30-90 min60-120 min60-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
1-65-124-105-30
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
DecisionTreeOptions
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods