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
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30–60 min60-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-204-84-105-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods