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 many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of Stakeholder Salience Model with its method-specific working model.
Facilitation
Stakeholder Salience 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 problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min15-30 min60–90 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
5-122-82-83-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityQuestion List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesSalience Diagram, Strategy per Class
Tags1 shared
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance
Add more methods