In short
You combine PresentersWall and ConsensIQ by first gathering ideas through open questions and then letting the group prioritise the best of those by spreading points. Both platforms run on the same technology from livewall, which makes the step from collecting to choosing smooth. That way you avoid having to fix a list of options in advance, while still reaching a choice the group actually supports.
Two steps, two tools, one session
ConsensIQ and PresentersWall are both built by livewall, the makers of interactive event software from Tilburg. PresentersWall is strong at gathering open input: participants type ideas, suggestions or answers to open questions, visible to the whole group. ConsensIQ is strong at the other end: letting everyone prioritise a limited set of concrete options by spreading points. Combining the two makes sense when you do not yet know what the options are, but still want a choice the group stands behind by the end of the session.
Think of a staff meeting where you first ask which improvements people would like to see, and only then decide which three of those should be tackled first. Or a members' meeting that first collects ideas for an anniversary and then chooses which idea gets developed.
Step by step: from ideas to a choice
How to run both tools one after another
- 1
Open question in PresentersWall
Ask an open question and let participants submit ideas from their phone, visible on screen for the whole group.
- 2
Select together or as an organiser
Go through the submitted ideas with the group, or as an organiser beforehand, and pick the options that are concrete and realistic enough to put forward.
- 3
Set up the question in ConsensIQ
Turn the chosen ideas into options in a ConsensIQ question, with text or an image per option.
- 4
Prioritise by spreading points
Let everyone spread their points over the options, possibly across several rounds where the least supported option drops out.
- 5
Report back the result
Show the outcome on screen and explain what happens with the chosen option, so the link between input and decision stays clear.
Why this order works
An open question without a follow-up often produces a long list of ideas nobody acts on. A points round without a preceding open step forces you to guess which options matter beforehand. By combining both you first gather broadly what is on people's minds, then let the group itself decide what really counts. Participants feel heard twice: once when submitting their idea, once when spreading their points.
When this fits your session
This combination suits sessions where you have enough time for two steps, for example half a day or an evening meeting, and where the outcome of the open question can genuinely shape the options you put forward later. For shorter sessions where the options are already fixed, ConsensIQ on its own is usually enough. Think of a short team meeting where the three options to discuss are already known: in that case you can start directly with ConsensIQ, skipping the open round beforehand.
Practical considerations
Keep in mind that the open round in PresentersWall will usually produce more ideas than fit into a ConsensIQ question; with a maximum of ten options per question, you always need to select. Be clear about that upfront, so participants do not expect every idea to automatically reappear in the voting round. You can also give a short explanation of why certain ideas were or were not carried forward, which helps avoid disappointment afterwards.
Build in enough time between the two parts as well. Selecting options from an open round takes a moment of thought, especially when a lot of input comes in, and that is best not done under time pressure right before the voting round starts.
Check the plans page to see which level of support fits a session using both tools.
By putting open collection and focused prioritising one after the other, you combine the best of both: broad input and a sharp, widely supported choice.