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 for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge.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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min5-15 min60–90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-123-202-85-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods