View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Agile NoEstimates |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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. | 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | laufend | 5-20 min | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 2-12 | 3-20 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | EstimationForecastingFlow | EstimationEffortRisk | ForecastingFlowDelivery |