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 Power Interest Grid |  Agile Ideal Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | When effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 5-20 min | 30-60 min | 15-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 3-20 | 2-8 | 2-9 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortRisk | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | EstimationEffortAgile |