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 |  Product Discovery Context Canvas |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Specification by Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an environment of users, systems, and constraints is hard to grasp, it puts the context compactly on the table. It creates a clear reading of influence, boundary, and dependency. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | When business rules need to become precise, it ties language, example, and test together. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as an Example Table and Acceptance Tests. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 60-90 min pro Feature |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-9 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Context canvas, Open questions, Shared context notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Example Table, Acceptance Tests |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | ContextFramingRequirementsCanvas | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | AgileRequirementsExamplesBehavior-Driven Development |