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 of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay
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.IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.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.Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumHigh
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-3 h60-120 min90-180 min
Participantsdifferent
3-202-85-123-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityCoD Table, Prioritization Sequence
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision
Add more methods