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 for NoEstimates.
Agile
NoEstimates
Paper illustration for Dot Estimation.
Facilitation
Dot Estimation
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules.When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets.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
MediumLowLow
Timedifferent
laufend5-20 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-123-203-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing RulesEffort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion TargetsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
EstimationForecastingFlow
EstimationEffortRisk
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Monte Carlo Forecasting.
Delivery
Monte Carlo Forecasting