View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Dot Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60–90 min | 1-3 h | 5-15 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 2-8 | 5-30 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist |
Tags1 shared | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization |