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 a branching impact map with a Why goal at the root, actor circles, How behavior changes and What options.
Product Strategy
Impact Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Gap Analysis method illustration showing its working structure
Business Strategy
GAP Analysis
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 a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min45-90 min60-120 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-203-85-122-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistImpact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery OptionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityGap Matrix, Action Plan, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
StrategyAnalysisPlanning
Add more methods