View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Innovation Design Charrette |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 5-15 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 10-50 | 5-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |