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 Hooked Model with its method-specific working model.
Growth
Hooked Model
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.The Hooked Model helps clarify engagement loops, user behavior, and experiments. It makes repeat behavior measurable and captures the result as a hooked loop, trigger map, and reward design.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-15 minMultiple workshops over several weeks
Participantsdifferent
5-123-202-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistHooked loop, Trigger map, Reward design, Ethics check
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
GrowthBehaviorRetention
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of ICE Scoring with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
ICE Scoring