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 User Story Mapping |  Operations ALPEN Method |  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 user goals and delivery scope could drift apart, it orders the journey from goal to slice. It makes visible where an MVP can genuinely be cut. | With an overloaded day full of too many tasks, a realistic picture of the day emerges. The method connects estimating, deciding, and buffer thinking so planning fits available energy and time. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 2-4 h | 10-20 min daily | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-10 | 1 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Story Map, Release Slices, Backlog Candidates | Daily Plan, Time Estimates, Review Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | BacklogJourneyPlanningMVP | PlanningTime managementProductivityOperations | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |