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 Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay
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.Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence.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
LowHighMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min90-180 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-203-85-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistCoD Table, Prioritization SequenceRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tags1 shared
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of ICE Scoring with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
ICE Scoring