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 for Dot Estimation.
Facilitation
Dot Estimation
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 size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets.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 min5-20 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
1-83-203-205-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistEffort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion TargetsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
EstimationEffortRisk
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods