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 Kanban |  Delivery Shape Up |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Agile NoEstimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work sits in too many parallel streams, throughput suffers and no one sees the bottlenecks. Kanban makes the flow of work visible and limits overload so a system becomes calmer and more predictable. | Shape Up helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow. It makes work boundaries and decisions explicit and captures results as pitches, bet-table decisions, and hill charts. | 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 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 6 Wochen Cycle + 2 Wochen Cool-Down | 15-45 min | laufend |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-4 pro Pitch | 1-8 | 2-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Pitches, Bet-table decisions, Hill charts, Cooldown outcomes | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules |
Tagsno overlap | FlowVisual managementDelivery | PlanningDeliveryAutonomy | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationForecastingFlow |