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
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
Paper illustration of a JTBD interview notebook with a decision timeline, forces of change and a concise job hypothesis.
Product Discovery
Jobs to Be Done
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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 features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight.When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought.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
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
5-15 min1-2 Tage1-3 Wochen60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-2010-505-12 Interviews5-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistKano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesJob Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity ListRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
CustomerOutcomesNeeds
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods