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 Affinity Estimation.
Agile
Affinity Estimation
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Bucket System.
Agile
Bucket System
Purposedifferent
When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes.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 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 a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30-90 min5-15 min60-120 min30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-205-123-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear ItemsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityBucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates
Tagsno overlap
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
Add more methods