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 Three-Point Estimation.
Decision Making
Three-Point Estimation
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.A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes.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
MediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-120 min10-30 min je Item5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
5-121-83-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityThree-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for PERT Estimation.
Decision Making
PERT Estimation