View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Operations ABC Analysis |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 10-30 min je Item | 5-15 min | 30-60 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-20 | 1-5 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | EstimationUncertaintyRisk |