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 Dot Estimation.
Facilitation
Dot Estimation
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.When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-20 min1-3 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
5-123-205-304-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityEffort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion TargetsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
EstimationEffortRisk
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods