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 for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
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.When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-15 min30-60 min je Interview10-20 min
Participantsdifferent
5-123-205-12 Interviews4-100+
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
Add more methods