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
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 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.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30-60 min je Interview30-60 min je Interview1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-205-10 Interviews5-12 Interviews5-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistSolution Feedback, Objection List, Validation NotesProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ValidationInterviewsPrototype
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods