View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Agile Planning Poker |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 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. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |