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
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
A paper-based illustration representing WSJF with its core stages and visible working result.
Agile
WSJF
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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 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 tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage60-120 min45-90 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
10-505-123-103-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tags1 shared
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods