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
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
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
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.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
15-30 min60–90 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
2-82-83-205-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning PromptsStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tags1 shared
QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods