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
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
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 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 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 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
60-120 min1-2 Tage45-90 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-1210-503-103-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityKano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesRanked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tags1 shared
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods