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 Opportunity Scoring with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Opportunity Scoring
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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 opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes.When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min60-120 min1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
3-103-65-303-20
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsOpportunity Score Table, Top OutcomesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods