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
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
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.In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.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.Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
5-15 min20–45 min60-120 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-20Small cross-functional group5-122-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRisk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods