methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Planning Poker.
Agile
Planning Poker
Paper illustration for Ideal Days.
Agile
Ideal Days
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for Affinity Estimation.
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 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.In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving.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
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
2-5 min je Item15-60 min45-90 min30-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-92-93-123-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split CandidatesIdeal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity CaveatsForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAffinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items
Tagsno overlap
EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam
EstimationEffortAgile
ChangeDecisionStrategy
EstimationBacklogRelative sizing
Add more methods