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
Paper illustration for 8D Problem Solving.
Operations
8D Problem Solving
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
A 5 Whys working surface connects an observable problem with evidenced causes, marked uncertainty and concrete countermeasures with ownership.
Operations
5 Whys
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 an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-6 Wochen60-120 min15-30 min
Participantsdifferent
3-204-105-122-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action PlanRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRoot cause notes, Countermeasures
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
QualityProblem solvingRoot cause
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving
Add more methods