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 Future Reality Tree.
Systems Thinking
Future Reality Tree
Paper illustration of Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
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.A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation.Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy.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
LowHighHighMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min2-4 hHalf day1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-203-83-125-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistFuture Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved InjectionsLeverage Map, Action StrategyConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods