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 Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  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 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 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 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 | 30-60 min | 5-15 min | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 3-20 | 5-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Backlog, Cost-of-Delay Assumptions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority |
Tagsno overlap | LeanEconomicsSequencePrioritization | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion |