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 for Fishbowl Discussion.
Facilitation
Fishbowl Discussion
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 controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover.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.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min45-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-68-805-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Opportunity Score Table, Top OutcomesDiscussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds
FacilitationDialogueLarge group
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for World Café.
Facilitation
World Café
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All