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 for Delegation Poker.
Facilitation
Delegation Poker
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 decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice.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
MediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
5-123-105-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityDelegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role AgreementsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AutonomyRolesTeam
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration for 3-Circle Venn Diagram
Facilitation
3-Circle Venn Diagram