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
A hypothetical failure makes concrete risks, signals, and fitting mitigations visible.
Decision Making
Pre-Mortem
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures.When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
20–45 min30-60 min60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
Small cross-functional group3-105-123-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption logRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
RiskDecisionFailurePlanning
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods