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
How Might We
Innovation
How Might We
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Purposedifferent
With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction.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.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.
Complexitysame
LowLowLow
Timedifferent
30–45 min5-15 min15-45 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-201-3
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsync
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistADR File, Decision Log, Rationale
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop