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 of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Affinity Estimation.
Agile
Affinity Estimation
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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 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 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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-3 h30-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-205-303-124-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAffinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear ItemsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods