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 Ideal Days | ![]() Decision Making Force Field Analysis | ![]() 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 | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-5 min je Item | 15-60 min | 45-90 min | 30-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-9 | 2-9 | 3-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Relative Estimates, Assumption Notes, Split Candidates | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Affinity Size Map, Grouped Estimates, Unclear Items |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationAgileRelative sizingTeam | EstimationEffortAgile | ChangeDecisionStrategy | EstimationBacklogRelative sizing |



