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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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 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 a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
laufend5-15 min60-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
2-123-204-105-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing RulesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
EstimationForecastingFlow
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods