View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Operations Bottleneck Analysis |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For a flow that backs up at one point, the method looks for the capacity limit with the greatest leverage. It explains why extra effort elsewhere barely improves throughput. | 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 estimating slows a team down more than it helps, it shifts the focus to flow, small slices, and real lead time. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, and Slicing Rules. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-5 min je Item | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-9 | 2-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Bottleneck Map, Flow Metrics, Improvement Options, Follow-up Measures | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | FlowMeasurementConstraints | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationForecastingFlow |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
