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 |  Operations Process Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | With a confusing workflow that has many handoffs, the method makes the actual process visible. It shows where work is passed on, delayed, or duplicated, so improvement targets the right spots. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 1-3 h | 5-20 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-20 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Process Map, Handoff List, Improvement Backlog | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | ProcessOperationsImprovement | EstimationEffortRisk | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause |