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 for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
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 controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover.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
LowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30–45 min45-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-108-805-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea PromptsDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Round Robin Brainstorming
Innovation
Round Robin Brainstorming
Paper illustration for World Café.
Facilitation
World Café