View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Delivery RAID Log |  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. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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 | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 30-60 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 2-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |