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 for Three-Point Estimation.
Decision Making
Three-Point Estimation
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
10-30 min je Item5-15 min60-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-83-204-105-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods