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 Power Interest Grid |  Delivery Monte Carlo Forecasting |  Facilitation Alignment 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 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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, and Risk Communication. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | laufend | 30-60 min | 30-90 min Setup, danach laufend | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 2-8 | 1-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Throughput Data, Flow Forecast, Slicing Rules | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Forecast Percentiles, Throughput Dataset, Risk Communication | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationForecastingFlow | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | ForecastingFlowDelivery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |