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 branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
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 navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination.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.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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min1-2 Tage10-20 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-12Based on research question4-100+3-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityFindability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Information architectureNavigationFindability
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods