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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 many tasks need to be classified quickly, it sorts them by perceived effort and similarity. It reduces the effort of fine-grained estimation for large volumes. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 60–90 min | 30-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-8 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |