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 Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for CATWOE Analysis.
Systems Thinking
CATWOE Analysis
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.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.CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way.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
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30-60 min5-15 min45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-203-85-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Power Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistCATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, ConstraintsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods