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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of Competency Questions with its method-specific working model.
Knowledge Modeling
Competency Questions
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.Competency Questions translate a domain model into concrete questions that it must be able to answer. The method keeps the model's scope clean and prevents pretty but useless structures.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 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.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min2-4 h1-3 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
5-122-85-304-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityCompetency Question Set, Required Concepts, Test Queries, Coverage MatrixConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
OntologyKnowledge graphScopeRequirementsSemantic
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods