View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  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. | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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 | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |