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 |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Dot 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. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | laufend | 1-5 Tage | 15-45 min | 5-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 4-12 | 1-8 | 3-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationEffortRisk |