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 for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
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.Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
LowHighLowMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-5 Tage60–90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-204-122-85-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistLogic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods