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
A paper-based illustration representing C4 Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
C4 Model
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.The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes.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
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min1-4 h1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-101-55-303-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogContext Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods