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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 60–90 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-12 | 2-8 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |