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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for Affinity Estimation.
Agile
Affinity Estimation
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Bucket System.
Agile
Bucket System
Purposedifferent
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 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 group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min30-90 min1-3 h30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-203-125-303-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistAffinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear ItemsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasBucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
Add more methods