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 Dot Estimation |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Expectation 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 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. | 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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 5-20 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-20 | 4-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortRisk | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam |