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 |  Business Strategy GAP Analysis |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  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. | GAP Analysis compares the current state with a target picture and makes the distance manageable. It becomes useful when, ahead of new initiatives, it must become clear which capabilities, processes, or resources are missing. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 1-3 h | 30-60 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Gap Matrix, Action Plan, Risk Notes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | StrategyAnalysisPlanning | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |