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 the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min60-90 min1-2 h1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
5-124-104-125-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tags1 shared
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods