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 of Opportunity Scoring with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Opportunity Scoring
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for World Café.
Facilitation
World Café
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
When opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes.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.When a group needs to connect many viewpoints in a short time, World Café creates a calm alternation between closeness and rotation. It sets thinking in motion without forcing the conversation into full-plenary rigidity.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-15 min60-180 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-63-2012-100+5-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Opportunity Score Table, Top OutcomesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistTable Notes, Emergent Themes, Shared QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationDialogueLarge groupSensemaking
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods