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 Feynman Technique.
Knowledge Modeling
Feynman Technique
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
The Feynman Technique checks understanding by explaining a topic so that it stays easy for others to understand. It makes knowledge gaps visible before they become costly in everyday work.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.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
20-60 min1-2 h60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
14-125-123-20
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Plain-language Explanation, Knowledge Gaps, Study NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
LearningKnowledgeUnderstanding
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods