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 a yellow story card, blue rule cards, green example cards and a red question card on a light workspace.
Agile
Example Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Purposedifferent
When a story carries business rules and exceptions, it brings clarity before implementation. It makes examples, open questions, and boundaries visible enough that the logic becomes jointly sound.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 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 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
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30-60 min60-120 min5-15 min10-20 min
Participantsdifferent
3-75-123-204-100+
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Example Map, Acceptance Criteria, Open QuestionsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistIdea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes
Tagsno overlap
Behavior-Driven DevelopmentRequirementsExamplesRefinement
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationInclusionIdeation
Add more methods