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 |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 3-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |