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 |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  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. | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. | 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 | 45-90 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 4-12 | 5-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationOptionsDecision | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |