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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.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
LowLowMedium
Timedifferent
30–45 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-103-205-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration for Round Robin Brainstorming
Innovation
Round Robin Brainstorming
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst