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 Solution Interview
Product Discovery
Solution Interview
Surveys method illustration showing its working structure
UX Research
Surveys
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation.When a topic needs to be validated broadly and many people can answer the same question, surveys gather structured feedback in a scalable form. Answers become comparable and segmentable instead of remaining merely anecdotal.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 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
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
30-60 min je Interview3-14 Tage60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-10 Interviews50+5-123-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation NotesSurvey Results, Charts, Segment InsightsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
ValidationInterviewsPrototype
QuantitativeResearchValidation
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods