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 a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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.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 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
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
15-30 min1-2 h5-15 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-123-205-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsPolarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods