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 shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for OODA Loop.
Decision Making
OODA Loop
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 workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving.In dynamic situations, decisions become outdated faster than they can be prepared. The OODA Loop holds observing, orienting, deciding, and acting together as a recurring rhythm so reaction does not slide into inertia.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-15 min45-90 min15-60 min je Zyklus
Participantsdifferent
5-123-203-121-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesSituation Assessment, Decision Loop, Action Updates
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ChangeDecisionStrategy
DecisionChangeLearningStrategy
Add more methods