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
A paper-based illustration representing WSJF with its core stages and visible working result.
Agile
WSJF
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
A paper-based illustration representing C4 Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
C4 Model
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
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.The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes.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
HighLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min5-15 min1-4 h60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-103-201-55-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistContext Diagram, Container Diagram, Component DiagramRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods