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
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder 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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min60-90 min60–90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
5-124-102-85-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tags1 shared
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods