View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Agile Planning Poker |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | When estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-5 min je Item | 15-45 min | 5-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-9 | 1-8 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationEffortRisk |