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
A paper-based illustration representing Design Sprint with its core stages and visible working result.
Innovation
Design Sprint
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess.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 an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution.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
HighLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
4-5 Tage5-15 min1-4 Wochen1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
5-83-203-10 Kunden5-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Prototype, Test Findings, Decision RationaleRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP RisksConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods