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 WSJF |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Operations 5 Whys |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many tasks compete for the same capacity, it orders work by economic impact. It makes time lost, benefit, and effort comparable together. | 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. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. | 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 | High | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 5-15 min | 15-30 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-20 | 2-6 | 5-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Root cause notes, Countermeasures | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |