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 of a Concept Map with concepts and labelled links
Knowledge Modeling
Concept Mapping
Paper illustration of many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly.When a problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-2 h15-30 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-201-82-85-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistConcept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge GapsQuestion List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods