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 |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  Delivery Communication Plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Communication Plan, Channel Matrix, Message Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | CommunicationStakeholdersDeliveryPlanning |