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 RAID Log with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Delivery
RAID Log
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.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.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30 min Setup, dann laufend60-120 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-201-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone5-124-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRAID Log, Status Report SourceRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods