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 for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice.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 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
LowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min60-120 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-105-125-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
AutonomyRolesTeam
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration for 3-Circle Venn Diagram
Facilitation
3-Circle Venn Diagram