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 |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Delivery RAID Log |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 1-2 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 4-12 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |