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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration for Affinity Estimation.
Agile
Affinity Estimation
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Bucket System.
Agile
Bucket System
Purposedifferent
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 need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min30-90 min1-3 h30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
5-123-125-303-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityAffinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear ItemsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasBucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
Add more methods