View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Agile Planning Poker |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 5-20 min | 2-5 min je Item | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-20 | 3-9 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | KnowledgeMappingRisk | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking |