View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile NoEstimates |  Operations ABC Analysis |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | With many similar objects of differing economic significance, the method prioritizes effort by effect. It separates what needs regular steering from what rarely needs attention. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 30-60 min | 10-30 min je Item | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 1-5 | 1-8 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | ABC Classification, Focus Rules, Control List | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | PrioritizationOperationsPortfolio | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting | EstimationUncertaintyRisk |