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
Gemba Walk workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
Gemba Walk
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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.When there is uncertainty about the real course of a process, the method brings observation to the place where work happens. It combines perception, follow-up questions, and process knowledge so decisions rest on actual workflows instead of assumptions.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.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
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30-120 min1-3 h60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-202-65-305-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistObservation Notes, Improvement IdeasConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
LeanObservationProcessOperations
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods