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 Teach-back.
Knowledge Modeling
Teach-back
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
Teach-back checks whether an explanation actually got through to the other person. The method makes misunderstandings visible early and strengthens shared understanding in advisory and learning situations.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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
5-20 min60-120 min1-2 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-85-124-123-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Understanding Check, Clarification Notes, Learning GapsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
LearningUnderstandingCommunication
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods