View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 5-30 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |