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 for Solution Interview
Product Discovery
Solution Interview
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
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 solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation.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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30-60 min je Interview60-120 min30-60 min je Interview
Participantsdifferent
3-205-10 Interviews5-125-12 Interviews
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistSolution Feedback, Objection List, Validation NotesRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ValidationInterviewsPrototype
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
Add more methods