EvalCompassEvalCompass

NGT implementation worksheet for facilitators

Strictly follow silent generation → round-robin → clarification → voting. Indicative time allocations are also provided.

When to use this worksheet and what completion involvesFictional completed example
Automatically saved on this device Entries are saved only in this browser. Save a PDF for sharing or submission.Paper: A4 · portrait. Check the orientation in print preview.
EvalCompass Worksheet

NGT implementation worksheet for facilitators

Method: Nominal Group Technique
Strictly follow silent generation → round-robin → clarification → voting. Indicative time allocations are also provided.

Basic information

Session settings

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Purpose and central question
What should we try next to reduce barriers to using the desk?
Date, time and location
September 13, 2026, meeting room
Participant count and characteristics
3 people with service experience and 3 staff
Facilitator name
Facilitator A

Reason for this entry: Limit the question and group composition.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Session settings

Limit the question and group composition.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Follow each field’s heading to record the program name, focus, period, and other details. Leave undecided matters clearly marked as unresolved.

Read the full fictional example

Idea collection: round-robin

Number and record all presented ideas without assessment or comments.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

NumberIdeaClarification notes
1Add telephone bookingFor people uncomfortable online
2Pilot evening appointmentsFor employed people
3Shorten information textPut necessary information on one sheet.

Reason for this entry: Check meaning differences before combining similar ideas.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

NumberIdeaClarification notes
Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Number and record all presented ideas without assessment or comments.

Check meaning differences before combining similar ideas.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Vote totals

Aggregate anonymous ballots using selection counts and points agreed beforehand for the number of options. Share totals and selection counts by idea number, not individual votes.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Idea numberIdea summaryTotal pointsNumber selecting
1Telephone booking85
2Evening appointments64
3Short information text43

Reason for this entry: Each person chooses 2 options, giving 12 selections and 18 points overall.

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Idea numberIdea summaryTotal pointsNumber selecting
Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Aggregate anonymous ballots using selection counts and points agreed beforehand for the number of options. Share totals and selection counts by idea number, not individual votes.

Each person chooses 2 options, giving 12 selections and 18 points overall.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Keep the information in each row aligned. Scroll wide tables horizontally to see every column.

Read the full fictional example

Final agreement notes

Record the top 3–5 priorities agreed after voting and how they will be used.

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

Votes: 2 people rank 1>2; 1 ranks 2>1; 1 ranks 2>3; 1 ranks 1>3; 1 ranks 3>1, left option first. Make telephone booking the first choice and check staff burden.

Reason for this entry: Show voting rules and original combinations to enable checking.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

Record the top 3–5 priorities agreed after voting and how they will be used.

Show voting rules and original combinations to enable checking.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Use the example as a reference and record what you have established about your own program. Distinguish assumptions and unchecked matters from confirmed facts.

Read the full fictional example

Process check

Completed example for this section (fictional)

This fictional example is for explanation. Adapt it to your own program. Your entries will not change.

  • ☑ Checked: Allowed 5–10 minutes of silent generation
  • ☑ Checked: Everyone shared or passed during round-robin
  • ☑ Checked: Excluded criticism and evaluation until clarification
  • ☑ Checked: Conducted anonymous voting
  • ☑ Checked: Disclosed totals to everyone

Reason for this entry: A fictional example allowing 7 minutes for independent thinking, with everyone sharing or passing.

Writing tips and explanation for this section

About this section

A fictional example allowing 7 minutes for independent thinking, with everyone sharing or passing.

View the method explanation

Writing tips

Read each item and check those you have confirmed. Do not use the fictional example’s checkbox states as findings about your own program.

Read the full fictional example

Before writing, check when to use the worksheet and what completion involves

NGT implementation worksheet for facilitators is a worksheet for applying Nominal Group Technique in meetings or individual work. For the overall duration of the method, use “Illustrative estimate, adjusted to scale and staffing: 1–3 hours for 1 group session” as a reference, adjusting for scale and resources. Fill in what you know provisionally and leave unresolved matters as questions to check next.

When this worksheet is useful

  • When designing equal opportunities for people of different roles or status to contribute
  • When quickly reaching group agreement on evaluation questions, criteria or improvement proposals
  • When preventing domination by louder participants during brainstorming

Participants and preparation

Small groups; CDC's preparation example uses 5–9 people, adjusted for purpose and speaking opportunities, with 1 facilitator and 1 recorder. One session; several groups may run concurrently.

Bring the materials used for decisions, existing data, and differing stakeholder views to help complete the worksheet.

Suggested order

  1. 1. Basic informationSession settings
  2. 2. Idea collection: round-robinNumber and record all presented ideas without assessment or comments.
  3. 3. Vote totalsAggregate anonymous ballots using selection counts and points agreed beforehand for the number of options. Share totals and selection counts by idea number, not individual votes.
  4. 4. Final agreement notesRecord the top 3–5 priorities agreed after voting and how they will be used.
  5. 5. Process check

Signs the worksheet is ready for review

  • Prioritized ideas with vote totals
  • All ideas recorded on flipcharts

Cautions for review

  • Skipping silent generation in favor of immediate hand-raising loses NGT's greatest benefit.
  • Allowing participants to say “Same as someone else” during round-robin undermines equality. Clarify rules for passing.
  • Maintain anonymous counting because senior participants may pressure others to change votes afterward.
Read a completed fictional example (your entries will not change)
Fictional example; not actual results

A fictional illustrative meeting: 6 people select the top 2 of 3 options, assigning 2 points to first and 1 to second.

Basic information

Purpose and central question
What should we try next to reduce barriers to using the desk?
Date, time and location
September 13, 2026, meeting room
Participant count and characteristics
3 people with service experience and 3 staff
Facilitator name
Facilitator A

Reason for this entry: Limit the question and group composition.

Idea collection: round-robin

Scroll horizontally to view the table

NumberIdeaClarification notes
1Add telephone bookingFor people uncomfortable online
2Pilot evening appointmentsFor employed people
3Shorten information textPut necessary information on one sheet.

Reason for this entry: Check meaning differences before combining similar ideas.

Vote totals

Scroll horizontally to view the table

Idea numberIdea summaryTotal pointsNumber selecting
1Telephone booking85
2Evening appointments64
3Short information text43

Reason for this entry: Each person chooses 2 options, giving 12 selections and 18 points overall.

Final agreement notes

Votes: 2 people rank 1>2; 1 ranks 2>1; 1 ranks 2>3; 1 ranks 1>3; 1 ranks 3>1, left option first. Make telephone booking the first choice and check staff burden.

Reason for this entry: Show voting rules and original combinations to enable checking.

Process check

  • ☑ Checked: Allowed 5–10 minutes of silent generation
  • ☑ Checked: Everyone shared or passed during round-robin
  • ☑ Checked: Excluded criticism and evaluation until clarification
  • ☑ Checked: Conducted anonymous voting
  • ☑ Checked: Disclosed totals to everyone

Reason for this entry: A fictional example allowing 7 minutes for independent thinking, with everyone sharing or passing.

Common errors in judgment

Starting with free discussion and voting for frequently mentioned ideas

How to revise: Start with independent generation and round-robin sharing.

Reason: Collect opinions before they are influenced by others' statements.

Implementing the highest-scoring idea without consideration

How to revise: Check rankings, resources and implementation conditions.

Reason: Voting expresses participant priorities, not implementation conditions.

Editorial and checking information

Content updated: Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)No documented human reviewIncludes fictional examplesEditorial policy and scope of checkingCite this pageReport a correction

References and checked sections

  1. Gaining Consensus Among Stakeholders Through the Nominal Group Technique (Evaluation Briefs No. 7)
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · 2018
    Section consulted
    Defining the Nominal Group Technique; The Four Step Process to Conduct NGT; p.1 How to Prepare for NGT / The Meeting Room
    How it relates to the text
    Record individual ideas, clarify meanings, then prioritize through individual voting. A room for 5–9 people is a preparation example, not an optimal count for every setting.
    Source checked: (includes AI cross-checking)

How to cite this page

EvalCompass Editorial Team. “NGT implementation worksheet for facilitators”. EvalCompass, updated 2026-10-07. https://evalcompass.jun-nakatani.com/en/worksheets/nominal-group-technique/
Add the date you accessed the page. Text created by this site is available under CC BY 4.0. Quotations, external materials, and bundled fonts have their own terms of use. When reusing content, credit the source, link to the license, and indicate any changes.

Suggest a correction or improvement to this page

Change history
  • — Updated explanations to correspond with sources, and added method-specific fictional worksheet examples, judgment examples and revision history.
  • — Made minimal corrections to assertions, fixed conditions or inconsistencies between worksheets and examples based on content check FW-02. Preserved field counts, order, labels and section structure. Did not change verification status of unchecked material.
  • — Based on limited follow-up investigation FW-U01–U05, clarified applicability of analysis methods, recording deadlines and participant counts and premises for response checks. Preserved existing fields without declaring numerical guidance itself erroneous.