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 shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of ICE Scoring with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
ICE Scoring
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 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.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 ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min5-15 min60-120 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
2-103-205-122-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
RICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group PriorityICE Table, Top Idea List
Tags1 shared
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision
Add more methods