View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Growth A/B Testing |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. | 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. | When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 Wochen | 5-15 min | 30-60 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-6 | 3-20 | 2-8 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | ICE Table, Top Idea List | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |