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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
A paper-based illustration representing WSJF with its core stages and visible working result.
Agile
WSJF
Paper illustration of Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay
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 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 many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together.Helps clarify scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighHigh
Timedifferent
60-120 min5-15 min45-90 min90-180 min
Participantsdifferent
5-123-203-103-8
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsCoD Table, Prioritization Sequence
Tags1 shared
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision
Add more methods