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 for Risk Storming.
Architecture
Risk Storming
Paper illustration of a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog.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 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 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
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min30-60 min1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
4-123-105-303-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action BacklogRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods