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 radar with five axes, two current and target profiles, and evidence cards beside each dimension.
Decision Making
Radar
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for ABC Analysis
Operations
ABC Analysis
Purposedifferent
When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do.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 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.With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-3 h60-120 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
2-105-305-121-5
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopAsync
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio
Add more methods