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 Bucket System.
Agile
Bucket System
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
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.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 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.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30-90 min5-15 min1-2 h60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-204-125-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split CandidatesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods