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 of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Problem Framing Workshop.
Facilitation
Problem Framing Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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 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.When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other.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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min1-3 h60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
3-105-304-103-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods