View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation Double Diamond |  Agile Working Agreements |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | When collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. | 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 effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | Wochen bis Monate | 45-90 min | 2-5 min je Item | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-9 | 2-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tagsno overlap | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | TeamCollaborationAgile | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortAgile |