Method guide · Work with a structured grid
Dot Voting
Identify options attracting interest with equal dot allocations, keeping ties and serious concerns for further consideration.
- People
- 2–120
- Base procedure time
- 5 minutes
- Recording
- Shared record
Purpose: Organise and narrow ideas.
English guide
Text acceptance is not approval of this rendered page, its media, or publication.
How this method works
A convergence method for quickly finding options attracting interest by distributing equal numbers of dots among displayed options. Use it when there are many proposals and discussing them one by one would consume the available time. Each person has three dots and may put all on one option or spread them across several. Once everyone finishes, count dots per option and retain leaders for the next discussion. The result is an option list with scores and a clear starting point for discussion. Do not make the final decision from dot totals alone; separately examine ties and serious concerns. Do not use majority voting to decide minority safety or rights.
Phase schedule
Minutes are cumulative from the start of the base plan, not a live timer. Read scaling for any additional time. Phase controls do not advance automatically.
Use the arrow keys, Home or End while these controls have focus. The complete phase schedule remains below, including without JavaScript.
- Set the selection criterion0–1 minutes from the start (1 minute)
Action: Set. Participation: Everyone.
Recording not separately specified for this phase
- Distribute dots1–2 minutes from the start (1 minute)
Action: Distribute. Participation: Individually.
Recording not separately specified for this phase
- Place dots2–4 minutes from the start (2 minutes)
Action: Place. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- Check the leading options4–5 minutes from the start (1 minute)
Action: Check. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
Facilitation steps
- For 1 minute, read one criterion for this vote and use it for every option.
- For 1 minute, give three dots to each person and explain that they may concentrate them on one option or spread them across several.
- For 2 minutes, participants attach dots to the margins of chosen cards without hiding others' dots.
- People who finish move away from the voting surface to leave passage for those still choosing.
- For 1 minute, the recorder counts each option's dots, writes the total on the card, and reads the top three options.
- Do not assert an order among ties; retain tied options at the same rank for the next discussion.
If something changes
If
Two or more options tie at the boundary of the top three.
Then
Keep all at the same rank and compare implementation conditions in the next stage.
If
One card receives at least twice as many dots as other cards.
Then
Hear one sentence each from two people about the concentration and write the reasons beside the score.
If
After voting, more than half of all options have no dots.
Then
Check understanding of the criterion once and move zero-score options to pending without repeating the vote.
Preparation
Materials
- Three same-colour dot stickers per person, 12–20 mm in diameter
- One option card per option, A5 or larger
- One dark-coloured scoring pen per voting surface
Room and setup
- Display option cards without overlap in a row or grid
- With 31 or more people, prepare one voting surface per 30 people showing the same options
Adjust for people and time
With 2–30, use one voting surface. With 31–120, use groups of no more than 30, voting simultaneously on surfaces with identical options and criteria. Each recorder counts dots per option, and the facilitator adds totals for the same options. Display options and distribute three stickers each before starting to retain the five-minute frame as numbers grow.
Safety and non-applicable situations
Use dot totals to open further discussion, not as a final decision. Preserve tied options and examine serious concerns. Minority safety and rights are not decided by majority vote. Keep passage clear and do not repeat voting for zero-score options under the stated branch.
Historical translation and source notes
These original notes are retained verbatim with their fixed source versions. This historical label does not resolve a source-specific concern or establish current acceptance.
- The twice-as-many branch refers to ‘other cards’ without identifying one comparison card, a maximum, or an average. That wording remains without an invented comparison statistic.
Manuscript's recorded references
These translate the original manuscript's source and rights claims. They remain separate from any current-page notice below; they do not establish new verification.
- Donna Benjamin and Matt Takane: Dot Voting
https://openpracticelibrary.com/practice/dot-voting/
Adaptation under CC BY 4.0; changes made
- Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CC BY 4.0
Current-page licence notice
A Taiwa no Fumen adaptation based on the Open Practice Library practice identified below. The manuscript's recorded references and the source page checked for this notice are shown separately.
Changes: explanations, timings, instructions, materials and branches were edited for this site. The English edition translates that Japanese manuscript; it is not a verbatim translation of the original practice.
The checked source footer names CC BY 4.0 but links to CC BY-SA 4.0. The official site source code contains the same mismatch. This has not been confirmed with the rights holders. This notice does not change the terms of the original material.
This site's contributions to the identified adaptation and English translation are shared under CC BY-SA 4.0. Credit the creators, identify the source and licence, indicate changes, and share adaptations under the same terms. This does not remove separate source terms or third-party rights.
This is not a blanket licence for the whole site, other original manuscripts, third-party photographs, logos, external templates or trademarks. The source's Except where noted qualification remains applicable.
Names are used descriptively to identify the source. No endorsement or approval by Open Practice Library or its contributors is implied.
See the linked legal code for its no-warranty and other provisions.
The additional contributor names are handles from the fixed official practice source. They are not inferred real names or a reconstruction of collapsed editor labels. The earlier attribution limits remain recorded.
Credits on the checked source page
- Named contributors on the source page: Donna Benjamin, Matt Takane
- Contributors listed in the official practice source (repository handles): @kattekrab, @mtakane, @eliseelk
Source page checked on 2026-10-17: Dot voting.
Source lineage
CC BY-SA 4.0 — this site's adaptation and translation contributions · Legal code · Official source policy
This material-specific notice does not itself establish publication clearance. Preserved manuscript references above remain separate from the current page's credits and licence evidence.
Diagram, print, and video language
Original Japanese guide, diagram, and print view. Their labels and print text have not been translated; an English print edition is not provided here.
English video-library navigation. Original Japanese audio, subtitles and transcripts remain labelled Japanese resources. Their translations are separate later work. No remote player is embedded here.
The manual English phase controls are a navigation aid, not a live facilitation timer. Interactive diagram motion remains pending.
Editorial provenance
Japanese source status and logs are provenance only. They do not mean this English text or interface was field-tested. Historical fixed-text acceptance and hold records remain specific to their recorded versions; displaying them neither asserts current acceptance nor resolves source-specific restrictions.