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 Affinity Estimation |  Agile Bucket System |  Operations Theory of Constraints |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | For a system that does not get faster despite effort, the method directs attention to the bottleneck. It concentrates improvement on the point that actually limits throughput. | When estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 30-90 min | 2-4 h Analyse, laufend | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 2-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Constraint Map, Improvement Plan, Flow Metrics | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | OperationsConstraintsFlowImprovement | EstimationForecastingFlow |