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 Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 5-20 min | 30-90 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 3-12 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |