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 |  Delivery Communication Plan |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 many people need to be informed in parallel and messages would otherwise arrive unevenly or too late, a Communication Plan orders communication reliably. Channels, audiences, and cadences interlock so important information doesn't get lost. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 4-12 | 2-6 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |