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 Team API with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team API
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
Half day initial, dann laufend1-3 h60-120 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
Ein Team plus Stakeholder5-305-124-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Team API DocumentConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods