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
Process Mapping method illustration showing its working structure
Operations
Process Mapping
Paper illustration of a review with planned work, actual event sequence, comparison, and assigned improvement actions.
Operations
After-Action Review
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots.After missions or project phases with unclear outcomes, the method makes visible what actually happened and what can be learned from it. It separates course, effect, and causes so experience turns into solid improvement.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 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
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h20-45 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-103-123-205-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement BacklogLessons learned, Action items, Event summaryRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
ProcessOperationsImprovement
LearningOperationsImprovement
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods