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 Bucket System |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Agile Affinity Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a large batch of work needs a fast, rough estimate, it sorts items into predefined size buckets. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, and Split Candidates. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min | 1-2 h | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-12 | 4-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Bucketed Backlog, Relative Estimates, Split Candidates | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |