A workshop produces thirty promising ideas and has time to develop only three. Dot voting gives each participant a limited number of stickers or digital marks to place beside preferred options. Counting the dots turns an unwieldy wall of suggestions into an initial picture of the group's priorities.
The basic facilitation method is deliberately lightweight. The facilitator must still specify whether people may stack several dots on one idea, whether they may vote for their own proposal, and what the result will decide. A shortlist for discussion is a different commitment from a binding allocation of money.
A map of attention
Suppose a neighborhood group is selecting improvements to explore. Dots may show strong interest in lighting and a playground, while a quieter proposal for step-free access receives fewer marks. The count reveals enthusiasm among those present; it does not reveal the severity of needs among people who could not attend.
Visible votes can also accumulate momentum as later participants follow an emerging favorite. Similar ideas may split support unless the group combines them first. Voting simultaneously or privately can reduce some of this influence. Dot voting is most informative when followed by a look at reasons, feasibility, and neglected concerns, so a convenient sorting device does not quietly become the group's entire theory of what matters.