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 |  Domain Modeling Context Map |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |  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. | When several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries. | When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-3 h | 10-20 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 2-8 | 4-100+ | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Context Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary Notes | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy | FacilitationInclusionIdeation | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |