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 Bucket System |  Delivery Shape Up |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 30-60 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |