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 |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Operations Accountability Ladder |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 15-45 min | 45-90 min | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-8 | 3-10 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam |