View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Bucket System |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 | 15-45 min | 1-2 h | 30-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |