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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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 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.When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h60-120 min10-20 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-105-124-100+3-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent ThemesRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods