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 Evaporating Cloud.
Systems Thinking
Evaporating Cloud
Paper illustration for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
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.The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict.Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain.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
LowMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min60-120 min1-5 Tage60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-202-84-125-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistConflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next ExperimentsLogic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods