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 |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 30-90 min | 5-20 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 2-8 | 3-20 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | EstimationEffortRisk | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |