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 Futures Wheel with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Futures Wheel
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event.When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min10-20 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-104-100+3-205-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods