View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Kano Model |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 5-15 min | 45-90 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 3-20 | 2-8 | 5-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |