View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Futures Wheel |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event. | 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. | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 30-90 min | 10-30 min je Item | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-12 | 1-8 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |