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 of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Purposedifferent
When many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.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 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
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min1-2 h1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-104-125-303-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods