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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for CATWOE Analysis.
Systems Thinking
CATWOE Analysis
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
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 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.CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way.When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
5-15 min60-120 min45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-205-123-82-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityCATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, ConstraintsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
Add more methods