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 Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.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
HighLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min30-60 min1-3 h5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
3-102-85-303-20
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay AssumptionsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods