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 a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h60-90 min60-120 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-124-105-125-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods