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 a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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
30-60 min60-90 min5-15 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-104-103-205-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Risk Matrix, Top Risk ListProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods