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 a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
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.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.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 min30-60 min60-120 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-203-105-122-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods