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 |  Innovation Brainwriting |  Agile Affinity Estimation |  Agile Working Agreements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 loud voices or hierarchy distort the idea search, the method creates a quiet entry into joint development. It gives everyone thinking space and gathers contributions without social brakes, making diversity more visible and easier to build on. | 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 collaboration needs more than implicit expectations, it lays out shared ground rules openly. It creates reliability for conduct, availability, and decision paths. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 15-30 min | 30-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Idea sheets, Expanded concepts, Prioritized list | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items | Working Agreements, Team Norms, Review Cadence |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | BrainstormingCollaborationInclusionIdeas | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | TeamCollaborationAgile |