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 Responsibility Poker |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Agile Planning Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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 estimates within the team diverge too much, it puts differing expectations on a common test bench. It separates rough complexity from unspoken assumptions. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 45-90 min | 5-20 min | 2-5 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-10 | 3-20 | 3-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam |