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 shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Root Cause Analysis.
Operations
Root Cause Analysis
Purposedifferent
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.For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description.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 problem keeps recurring and the cause stays unclear, the method exposes the underlying mechanism. It separates symptom, guess, and robust explanation from one another.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min15-30 min60-120 min1-4 h
Participantsdifferent
3-202-65-123-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRoot cause notes, CountermeasuresRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Statement, Cause Hypotheses, Confirmed Causes, Action Plan
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Root causeProblem solvingQualityIncident
Add more methods