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
Surveys method illustration showing its working structure
UX Research
Surveys
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
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 a topic needs to be validated broadly and many people can answer the same question, surveys gather structured feedback in a scalable form. Answers become comparable and segmentable instead of remaining merely anecdotal.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
MediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min3-14 Tage5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-1250+3-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PrioritySurvey Results, Charts, Segment InsightsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
QuantitativeResearchValidation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
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 Outcome-Driven Innovation with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Outcome-Driven Innovation
Paper illustration for Round Robin Brainstorming
Innovation
Round Robin Brainstorming