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 of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Trade-off Analysis.
Decision Making
Trade-off Analysis
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 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.With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects.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 min1-3 h45-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
2-105-302-83-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
RICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasTrade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted DownsidesRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods