View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Delivery RAID Log |  Facilitation Dot Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-2 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 4-12 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |