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 |  Agile Planning Poker |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Agile Bucket System |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2-5 min je Item | 5-20 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-9 | 3-20 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates |
Tags1 shared | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |