View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Working Agreements |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Facilitation Team Charter |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | 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 team is starting fresh or working past each other, Team Charter clarifies the shared working basis. It visibly sets out how collaboration, decision paths, and mutual conduct should work day to day. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 2-4 h | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 3-12 | 5-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Team Charter, Working Norms, Role Notes | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | TeamCollaborationAgile | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | TeamAlignmentCollaboration | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |