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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
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 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 many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.When many people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
5-15 min60-120 min60-90 min10-20 min
Participantsdifferent
3-205-122-104-100+
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
Add more methods