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 |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Bucket System |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-2 h | 30-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |