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 many question cards around one challenge
Facilitation
Question Burst
Paper illustration of Futures Wheel with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Futures Wheel
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When a problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation.The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event.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.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
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
15-30 min60-120 min1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-83-105-303-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsFutures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods