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
Paper illustration for Open Space Technology.
Facilitation
Open Space Technology
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When a complex topic does not yet have a fitting agenda, Open Space Technology hands topic ownership back to the participants. The format suits questions that only move forward when real interest determines the order.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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
HighMediumLow
Timedifferent
0.5-2 Tage1-2 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
20-500+4-123-20
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Session Marketplace, Proceedings, Action TopicsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tags1 shared
FacilitationLarge groupAutonomy
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping