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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 2-5 min je Item | 60–90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-9 | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |