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 a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min30-60 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
5-123-105-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration for 3-Circle Venn Diagram
Facilitation
3-Circle Venn Diagram