01 / UNDERSTAND
What is dot voting?
Dot voting is a simple way for a group to express preferences across a visible set of options. Participants allocate a limited number of marks, and the pattern helps the group choose where to focus discussion or further work.
It produces a preference signal from this group under these rules. It does not demonstrate customer demand, establish factual correctness or replace an accountable decision.
Why use Dot Voting?
When many ideas compete for attention, open discussion can favour the most persuasive speaker. A structured vote makes each contribution to selection visible and gives the group a practical starting point. Its value depends on the quality of the options and the meaning of the question being voted on.
When to use it
USE IT WHEN
A workshop needs to shortlist ideas for exploration.
Participants understand the options and share a useful selection criterion.
The decision is suitable for group input and its final owner is clear.
When to choose another method
Use Impact / Effort Matrix when tradeoffs need explicit examination.
Use RICE Scoring when comparable reach, impact and effort estimates can inform prioritisation.
Investigate evidence or obligations directly when a popularity vote cannot settle the question.
What you’ll need
Prepare readable options at a comparable level of detail. Explain the criterion, number of votes, whether votes may be stacked and how ties will be handled. State whether the vote is advisory or decisive. Ensure everyone can access the options and contribute without needing to speak over others.
What the method needs
Keep the elements that help answer your question and support a decision.
Distinct alternatives that participants can understand.
The question each vote is intended to answer.
How many votes each person has and where they may place them.
Time to consider before visible group influence takes over.
How the result informs action and what still needs review.
02 / PUT IT INTO PRACTICE
How to run a dot vote
Keep evidence and assumptions distinct. Revisit your work when new information changes your understanding.
01
Clarify the decision
Name what the shortlist will be used for and who makes the final choice.
Selecting ideas to prototype differs from authorising a release.
02
Prepare comparable options
Resolve unclear wording and identify near duplicates before voting. Preserve meaningful differences.
Three similar reminders should not compete as if they were unrelated concepts.
03
State the rules
Set equal vote allocations and clarify stacking, self voting and ties.
For a small workshop, three marks per person can be a practical starting rule.
04
Allow independent review
Give people quiet time to inspect the options and choose. Consider simultaneous reveal when influence is a concern.
Keep the strongest advocate from narrating choices during review.
05
Collect and count
Apply the rule consistently and retain the distribution, not only the winner.
Check that the number of allocated votes matches the agreed total.
06
Discuss the pattern
Ask what drove the selection and inspect important low vote concerns.
An accessibility issue does not become optional because few people selected it.
07
Record the next step
Document the chosen direction, rationale and questions that need evidence.
A shortlist should lead to a prototype or investigation, not a claim that the best idea is known.
Example: choosing a return service experiment
Fictional workshop: six people each receive two votes to choose ideas for an experiment. A booked collection receives five marks, a nearby drop off point four and a clearer return reminder three. The total is twelve votes.
The group selects collection for further exploration, but a participant notes that people unable to wait at home may be excluded. The team keeps that concern in the experiment brief and retains drop off as a comparison.
Five marks do not mean five people support collection because the rules allow stacking. The record therefore shows the allocation rule alongside the count. These numbers illustrate the method; they are not research findings.
03 / BELOW THE SURFACE
Below the surface: the ballot shapes the result
A vote can change when the same idea is split into several options or when unlike options compete.
OPTIONS
Are alternatives at comparable levels?
Check duplicates and uneven breadth.
RULE
What does one mark represent?
Make allocation and stacking explicit.
LIMIT
What must be decided outside the vote?
Preserve evidence needs and consequential concerns.
Suppose three reminder variants split support while a broad collection concept gathers all its votes in one place. The apparent winner partly reflects how the options were written. Inspect the ballot before interpreting the ranking.
Group genuine duplicates, but avoid merging concepts merely to make them win. If a change to the option set materially alters the decision, explain the change and run the selection again. Do not silently add counts from options with different meanings.
This guide’s editorial check is to ask whether the result is stable enough to guide the next step. If small wording changes reverse it, discussion and evidence may matter more than another round of dots.
Dot Voting companion worksheet
Page one records the decision, options and voting rules. Page two keeps the tally, interpretation, exceptions and next action together. The worksheet is a record of the selection, not an automatic scoring tool.
Practical tips
Write the voting criterion where everyone can see it.
Keep the full distribution available after the meeting.
Common mistakes
Changing rules after seeing the result.
Confusing vote count with number of supporters when stacking is allowed.
Treating a minority concern as unimportant by definition.
What you’ll get
A transparent shortlist and a documented next step. The result should narrow attention while keeping evidence and accountability separate from preference.