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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
A3 Problem-Solving workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
A3 Problem Solving
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 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.For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30-120 min60-120 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-202-65-122-5
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistObservation Notes, Improvement IdeasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityA3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause Analysis
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
LeanObservationProcessOperations
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations
Add more methods